of the Members to have power to make a Law it is all one as to have that authority without asking them the question The Members upon broaching such a doctrin for the King would cal it tyranny they might justly too in that case account themselves but ciphers And the like reason holds via versa if the Kings deniall to make a Law hinder not the force of it the absolute power is in the Members And whether a Law be of necessity to be made for the preservation of the Kingdome or not he who will be sole Judge of that necessity excludes the other if the King be Judge thereof the Houses are excluded if the Houses assume that power the King is excluded And then for the continuance of those Laws it is as easie for the Members to say they have cause to continue them as to pretend necessity to make them The Members judged it necessary for the preservatiō of the Kingdome to take from the Crowne the Militia of the Realme and to settle it upon themselves they desired the King to consent He refused thereupon the Members without the King usurped that power into their owne hands The Members now declare it necessary for the preservation of the Kingdome for them without the King to impose upon the people impositions taxes and payments without stint to make what Laws they thinke fit to exclude the King from His Regall Authority to assume the whole power of Government and that to be Arbitrary the King having been desired to consent hereunto He refuseth Upon this we see the Members without the King assume it witness the imposition of that horrid Tax by Excise Assesments condemning of their fellow Subjucts to death confiscating their Estates and the like so that no man can apprehend that the asking of the Kings consent which in shew they seemed to desire is in their esteeme indeed of any moment And the Members by excluding the King from His negative Voice having got possession of the wealth of the whole Nation and dominion over the people having thereby wrested from the King the Sword His Scepter and Soveraignty it selfe no doubt but the same necessity pretended by them at first to incroach this power will be still alleadged by them to make their usurped authority lasting which accordingly we find the Members have as much as in them lie made their raigne perpetuall They tell us first in generall that in all matters either concerning Church or State we have no Judge upon earth but themselves And so by their doome we are both for soul and body in an everlasting and absolute slavery unto our fellow Subjects Then they proceed to particulars and begin with the Militia of the Realme which they judge usetesse and as a thing lying dead whilst it is in the power of the King of England For say the Members by the constitutions of the Realme the King cannot by himselfe alone without consent of the two Houses raise money by taxing the people Therefore the power of the Militia say they inables Him not to do the Kingdome any effectuall service But those Members having arrogated a power without the King to impose upon the people without stint they do therefore judge the Militia to be their owne And I confesse they are in some sort necessitated thereunto for both we and they see that otherwise then by troopes of Horse and bands of Soldiers it is impossible to leavy upon the Subject those illegall burthens by the Members laid upon them So that it is now come to passe that our greatest happinesse is made the foundation of our greatest misery because the King governs us by a knowne Law these Members tell us we must not be governed by a King the Kings justnesse to His people hath furnished these Tyrants with arguments to dis-throne Him By the government under the King and that authority claimed by Him the people have such protection of their persons and property in their Lands and goods as that otherwise then the known Law declared by the sworne Judges of the Realme doth warrant the King cannot molest them in either therefore say the Members He ought not to have the power of the sword But on the other side the Members having usurped an arbitrary and tyrannicall power over the persons lives estates and fortunes both of King and people therefore the Militia of the Kingdom say they belongs to them so that upon the matter better it had been both for King and people if the King had assumed the Turkish tyranny for then the King even by the Members owne argument had kept His Crown nor had the Subject been in so great a slavery as now we had then been subject only to one tyrant but by this doctrine we are vassals to seven hundred The Members have already besides the whole Revenue of the Crowne which they have barbarously wrested from the King the Queen and the Royall Progeny taxed upon the people by way of Excise Assesments and such like new impositions before this Parliament never known nor heard of in England above 3000000. l. per annum for their owne setled Revenue yet all this serves not the turne of these blessed self-denying reformers Besides all this they force the people to lend to give they confiscate where they please and convert to their own use what summes of money they thinke fit Yet setting aside their owne pompe and glory no visible cause of expence appears saving the Souldiery who are kept for no other end but to awe the people and force those exorbitant and illegall contributions Secondly they have Judged the King whom themselves even this Parliament have sworne to be their onely Supreame Governour to be unfit to Governe And this for refusing to acknowledge it His duty to be governed by them His Subjects and so much as in Him lay perpetually to vassalage unto those Rebels Himselfe His Royall Posterity and all the rest of the people And to compleat the worke they have Judged it Treason for any Subject of England either to make application to His Soveraigne or to receive any Message from Him By which Tyranny the people of this Nation are brought into that sad condition as doubtlesse was never yet parallel'd even from the Creation upon the face of the whole earth For Traytors we are denounced both for doing and not doing one and the same thing By Act of Parliament it is high Treason to refuse to sweare the King to be the only Supreame Governour over all the people of the Realme And these Members against this knowne and declared Law although themselves have taken that Oath murther such Subjects as according to their duty make addresse unto Him And call that their due allegeance Treason And to colour these proceedings the Members have the boldnesse to vouch God himselfe to justifie the legality thereof The power of the Militia say they was the principall cause both of this late War and the quarrell
the Militia unto the Members is the same as to put the Sword into the hands of a mad-man for as the one hath no reason to restrain himself from doing mischief so the Members are not guided by any known Law but having usurped an Arbitrary power over King and Subject we finde by our wofull experience make use of the power of the Sword to compell the people to submit unto their insatiable lusts Witnesse besides the infinite murders and slaughters of the people the vast summes of money these Members since this Parliament by the power of the Sword have unlawfully wrested from the Subject which being justly cast up would amount to more then all the Subsidies grants of that nature given unto all the Kings of England for the space of 500. yeares before that Upon the whole matter clear it is the Militia of the Realme by the known Law of the Land is the sole and onely Right of the King And consequently all Commissions Powers and Authorities granted or given by the Members of the two Houses concerning this Warre are voide in Law and no Justification for those acting thereby But for the nature of that offence it is shewed in the next Chapter CHAP. IX That all persons who have promoted this Warre in the name of King and Parliament and such as have acted therein or adhered thereunto are guilty of Treason THe Office of the King and Duty of the Subject appeares before to be thus The King to Command and Govern according to the Established Lawes of the Realme The Subject to obey those Commands wherein the Law of all things abhors force and enjoynes peace which Peace by the Lawes of England is called the Kings Peace Therefore in every Indictment for Murder Felony or Trespasse done upon the person or estate of a subject These words viz. contra pacem domini Regis nunc Coronam dignitatem suam ought to be expressed for although the fact be done immediately against a Subject yet it trencheth against the Kings Authority His Law is thereby broken And the Lawes of England not onely protects the Kings Person from violence but preserves Him in His Royall Throne and Government Therefore if any persons in this Kingdome without command or assent of the King raise Forces Powers or Armes be it upon what pretence soever it is a Warre levied against the Kings Authority His Crown and Dignity For in that the Subject assumes the Regall power of the King Then for the Authors and Actors of this Warre the Kings Castles Forts His Navy Armes Ammunition and Revenues of His Crown are by force wrested out of His Hands Armes raised conducted into the Field Himself fought with in severall Battailes His Subjects in every part of the Kingdome by the awe of those Armies forced from their Allegeance Therefore a War it is and a War against the King The next Question is what the Law declares this offence to be And that appeares by the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. in these words Whereas divers opinions have been before this time in what case Treason shall be said and in what not The King at the request of the Lords and of the Commons hath made a Declaration in this manner When a man doth compasse or imagine the death of our Soveraigne Lord the King or of my Lady the Queen or of their Eldest Sonne and Heire or if a man do levy War against our Soveraigne Lord the King in this Realme or be adherent to the Kings Enemies in this Realme giving aide or comfort in the Realme or elsewhere and thereof be probably attainted of open deed by people of their condition c. It is to be understood that it ought to be Judged Treason By this clear it is That it is Treason to Levy War against the King to compasse or imagine the death of the King the Queen or Prince to adhere unto or aide the Kings Enemies Of all which the death of the King Queen and Prince excepted the Authors and Actors of this War are guilty But M. Prin hath by Authority of the Commons House of Parliament published a Treatise intituled thus The Parliaments present necessary defensive Warre is Just and Lawfull both in Law and Conscience and no Treason or Rebellion Answer This Title is like his whole discourse totally either impertinent or false This is not the Parliaments War but a War of the Members of the two Houses Nor is it a War on the Members behalf defensive but offensive which omitting to expresse when and by whom the Armies and Forces were first raised that being obvious to all men appeares by considering the Cause of the Warre which was thus The Members having formed a Law to take out of the Crown the power of the Militia and to settle it in themselves the King refused to consent unto it which refusall was the ground of this War wherein the King was onely Passive and the Members Active They pressed upon Him to change the Law He refused It were grosse in this case to conceive the King should make a War But the Members had no way to gain their ends but by force and so began the War Then Master Prin proceeds to prove that this Warre of the Members is not Treason For saith he they intended no violence to the Kings Person His Crown or Dignity onely to rescue Him from His Cavaleers and bring Him backe to His Great Councell Answer It is true sometimes the intent of the party committing the fact alters the case For example A man travelling the passage is stopt by water And finding a horse there makes use thereof to get over the water This is not Felony But it is a Trespaas Suppose this party indicted for felony at his triall it is pertinent for him to confesse the fact That he used the horse and by circumstances to make it appear he intended thereby onely to get over the water and so to quit himself of the fellony But this man being indicted onely for a Trespasse for him to confesse he used the horse to get over the water alledging he could not otherwise have passed thereby to quit himself of the Trespas were foolish So here raising of Armies against the Kings Command conducting them into the field c. is confessed But saith M. Pryn that is not Treason for they intended no harme to the Kings Person His Crown or Dignity Which is a fond contradiction for admitting they intended no harme to the Kings Person the fact confessed is a harme to His Crown and Dignity And that in the highest nature that may be It is a Warre Levied against Him and His Regall Authority which by the Laws of England is High Treason Raviliake who killed the King of France upon M. Pryns ground might have justified the fact Although he had confessed to have willfully killed that King yet he might with as much truth and sense have said he intended not to hurt the Kings Person As M. Pryn
name of King and Parliament and all such as have acted therein or adhered thereunto are guilty of Treason p. 100. CHAP. X. That the Subjects of this Nation are not only commanded from doing violence to the Kings Person or prejudice to His authority but are obliged with their lives and fortunes to assist and preserve His person and just rights from the fury of His enemies both forraigne and domestick p. 112. CHAP. XI That those persons at Westminster who call themselves The Parliament of England are not the two Houses nor Members of the Parliament p. 113. CHAP. XII Results upon the premises That the people of England under the government of the King according to the Laws of the Realme are a free Subject p. 125. CHAP. XIII That the people of England under the government claimed by the Members of the two Houses are absolute slaves p. 128. CHAP. XIV How the Subjects of England were brought into this slavery p. 132. CHAP. XV. The way how to restore the people unto their former Liberty p. 135. The Preamble or Introduction to the insuing Discourse wherein are contained the Motives which induced the Authour to take up Armes for the KING against the Forces raised by command of the Members of the two Houses of PARLIAMENT WHen the unhappy difference between His Majesty and the two Houses began to appear I endeavoured to satisfie my self of the cause thereof which I found to be thus The Members formed a 〈◊〉 concerning the Militia of the Kingdome to this effect viz. That certain persons by them therein named shall have power to Call together Muster and Arme all the people of the Kingdome and Conduct them into any part of the Realme to suppresse rebellious Insurrections or Invasions in such sort as the Members without the King shal signifie this power to continue so Long and no longer then those Members please and disobedience therein to be punished by the Members and none else This being presented to the King He refused to confirm it with His Royall Assent The Members thereupon stiling it An Ordinance of Parliament without the King declared it a Law By which in words not onely the Militia of the Kingdome and the Government of the Realm was taken from the Crowne and removed to the Members but an Arbitrary power usurped by them to signifie and declare what Facts were Rebellion and what not and accordingly by pretext and colour thereof caused the people to be Arrayed Armed and Mustered And so in effect the Kings Sword and Scepter wrested out of His hands by His owne Subjects And further the Members pretending the King not consenting to that Law was Evil-counselled by like Ordinances raised Armies appointed the Earl of Essex their Generall authorized them by War to Kill and slay their fellow Subjects and to remove from the King those pretended bad Counsellours The King by His Proclamation inhibited all Persons from adhering unto them and required His Subjects obedience unto Him their King Hereupon I seriously bethought my self whether I was obliged herein to obey the King or the Members and resolved the Laws of England ought to be my guide which I found to be thus That this Nation is governed by a known Law that Law expounded by the Judges of the Realme Those Judges appointed and authorized by the King our only Supream Governor unto whom alone all the people of England are obliged in point of Soveraignty and Government to submit themselves Then I considered in whom the power of the Militia was before the making of the aforesaid Ordinances Secondly 〈◊〉 â—â—…teration those Ordinances made For the first I found that the Militia of the Kingdome by the known Law was inherently in the King For the latter that no New Law can be made or the Old changed but by the King with the assent of the two Houses of Parliament And finding the King therein to dis-assent I did without scruple resolve the law was not altered therefore the Militia still in the Crown and consequently that it was my duty herein to obey the Kings Command not the Members Then I considered what was the offence of a Subject to joyne with those Forces raised by the Members which I found to be the crime of High Treason And lastly it being the duty of every Subject not onely to decline opposing his Soveraigne but to assist Him against all disloyall actions I took up Armes for Him and in His defence in this War Since which I have met with some Objections against these my proceedings which with my Answers to them I have set down in this ensuing Discourse And first concerning the grounds of the Law CHAP. I. That the Lawes of England consist in generall customes particular Customes and Acts of Parliament MOst evident it is that from the subduing of this Nation by the Romans which is about 1700 years agoe the people of this Realme have been governed by a Monarchicall power first under the Roman Emperours then under the Saxons awhile under the Danes again under the Saxons and lastly under the Norman Conquerour and his Progeny untill this day yet by what particular Laws those former Kings governed no authentick Author beyond the time of William the Conquerour doth make it appear But certain it is after that Conquerour had in a Battle slaine Harold and vanquished his Army which is neer 600 years since the people of this Nation submitted unto him as King of England who being in possession of the Crown agreed to Govern by known Laws Now whether those were new Laws introduced or the old continued as to this purpose is not materiall But by that very same Law as by severall Acts of Parliament it appeareth divers of his Successours Kings calling unto them for their advice such of their Subjects as they thought fit by Acts of Parliament made new Laws and changed the old but succeeding Kings since that have herein limited themselves insomuch as by the Constitutions of the Realme as now it is setled the Law of England consists in these three particulars 1. Generall Customes as thus the eldest Son to Inherit his Fathers Land the Wife to enjoy a Third part of her Husbands Inheritance for her Dower these and such like are generally Law throughout the Kingdome therefore called the Common Law 2. Particular Customes as thus in some places the yongest Son in other places all Equally Inherit their Fathers Land these and such like are particular Customes being fixed to particular places and by antient constant and frequent use is become Law there although not generally throughout the Kingdome 3. Acts of Parliament made by the King with the assent of the two Houses All which together that is to say The Common Law particular Customes and Acts of Parliament make the Law of England By this Law all men are protected in their Persons and Estates wherein there is no difference between King and People for neither King nor Subject hath or can justly
pro quibusdam arduis urgentibus negotiis c. quoddam Parliamentum nostrum apud civitatem nostram West 1. Die Maii prox futur ' teneri ordinavimus ibidem vobiscum cum Prelatis magnatibus proceribus dicti regni nostri colloquium habere tractatum vobis sub fide ligeantiis quibus nobis tenemini firmiter injungentes mandamus quòd personaliter c. So that to the institution of the Lords House and the power which the Members of that Assembly have to sit and Vote in Parliament the people are not at all consulted with in any particular And for the Commons House the institution thereof and the Commission which the Members of that Assembly have is derived from the King too That which the people act and do therein is only to elect the Knights of the Shires Citizens and Burgesses and therein too their authority is by the Kings Writ the direction whereof they are bound to pursue It is not in the power of the Inhabitants of any County or towne to adde unto or lessen the number of persons to be elected or to inlarge or limit the authority of those chosen But former Kings as before is shewed sometimes called more sometimes fewer and at their pleasure created new Corporations and gave them power to send Burgesses And every King had and at this day hath authority to enable and command every towne in England to send Burgesses to Parliament And when the Knights and Burgesses are elected the peoples power is ended then the persons chosen are to performe their duties wherein they must be guided by their Commission it is that which doth distinguish them from other men else every one in the Kingdome had equall power to sit and Vote in Parliament And they have no other Commission then the Kings Writ of summons which followeth in these words viz. Rex Vicecomiti salut ' Quia de avisamento assensu consilii nostri pro quibusdam arduis urgentibus negotiis nos statum defensionem regni nostri Angliae Ecclesiae Anglicanae concern quoddam Parliamentum nostrum apud Civitatem nostram Westm ' tertio die Novembris prox ' futur ' teneri ordinavimus ibidem cum Praelatis Magnatibus proceribus dicti regni nostri colloquium habere tract ' tibi praecipimus firmiter injungentes quod facta proclam ' in prox Comitatu tuo post receptionem hujus brevis nostri tenend die loco predict ' duos milit ' gladiis cinctos magis idoneos discretos Comit ' praedicti de qualib ' civitate Com' illius duos cives de quolibet Burgo duos Burgenses de discretior ' magis sufficientibus libere indifferenter per illos qui proclam ' hujusmodi interfuer ' juxta formā statutorum inde edit ' provis eligi nomina eorundum milit ' Civium Burgensiū sic electorum in quibusdam Indentur ' inter te illos qui hujusmodi election ' interfuerint inde conficiend ' sive hujusmodi elect ' presentes fuerint vel absentes inter eosque ad dict' diem locum venire facias Ita quod iidem milites plenam sufficientem potestatē pro se cōmunitate Comit ' Civitatū Burgorū praedictorum divisim ab ipsis habeant ad faciendum consentiendum his quae tunc ibid ' de communi consilio dicti regis nostri favente Deo contigerint ordinari super negotiis ante dictis Ita quod pro defectu potestatis hujusmodi seu propter improvidam electionem militum Civium aut Burgensium predictorum dicta negotia infecta non remaneant quovis modo Nolumus autem quod tu nec aliquis alius Vicecomes dicti Regis nostri aliqualiter sit electus electionem illam in pleno Comitatu factam distincte aperte sub Sigillo tuo singulis corum qui electioni illi interfuerint nobis in Cancellar ' nostram ad dictum diem locum Certifices indilate remittens nobis alteram partem Indenturarum predictarum praesentibus consuet ' una cum hoc breve Teste meipso apud Westminster And the returne of the aforesaid Writs in these words viz. Virtute istius Brevis eligi feci duos milites gladiis cinctos magis idoneos discretos de Comitatu meo viz. A. B. qui plenam sufficientem potestatem pro se Communitate Comit ' predict ' habent ad faciendum consentiendum iis quae ad diem locum infra contentos de Communi Consilio regni Angliae ordinari contigerint Et predicti A. B. manucapti sunt per quatuor manucapt ' ad assulendū ad Parliamentū dom ' Regis apud Westminster ad diem infra contentum ad faciendum quod hoc breve in se exigit requirit I have here exactly set downe all those Commissions by authority whereof the Lords House and the Commons House sit and Vote in those Assemblies which is far short of giving them power to make Laws That of the Lords commands them to advise and consult with the King concerning the great affaires of the Realme both in Church and Common-wealth That of the Commons to doe and consent unto such things as the King and the Peeres shall agree upon And as the Members have their authority to sit and Vote in the House from the King so it is at His will to summon a Parliament when and as often as He thinkes fit And the Members being met together are kept there as long as he pleaseth and at every instant time when he seeth cause dissolved againe And whilst they are continued together their office is to enquire and informe themselves of the grievances of the Kingdome to consult how to reforme them and for that purpose if need be to compose Laws and present them to the King But all this is onely by way of advise it binds not untill the King hath taken their Councell and put life into those Laws by His Assent All which is not onely pursuing their Commission but is made good by the constant practise of the Kingdome For there was never any Law Statute Act of Parliament or Ordinance made in this Nation which bound the people whereunto the King did not give His Royall Assent And scarce one Parliament since the Institution of the two Houses but the Members of both those Assemblies have passed Bils for new Laws presented them to the King which He hath rejected whereupon every such Bill was instantly set aside acknowledged by the Members and judged by all men to be invalid neither binding King or people And for these words le Roy s'avisera the opinion of Justice Hutton and the words of King Richard the second nothing can be inferred thereupon against the Kings negative Voice but rather the contrary The Kings answer say they to Bils presented to Him by the two Houses which He rejects is thus le Roy
s'avisera that is He will advise whether to confirme them or not It seemes to me strange to conclude thereupon Ergo the two Houses may make Laws without Him that is plainely a non sequitur but it doth directly imply that the King hath election to make it a Law or no Law else it were in vaine for Him to advise upon it And the words of King Rich 2. admitting that story to be true saying He conceived Himselfe bound by His Oath to consent unto that Law shewes first that it was in His power to consent or not to consent secondly that the Members could not do it without Him thirdly that it was only an obligation upon His Conscience And that He because He conceived it to be a just Law thought Himself tied in conscience to confirme it Upon the whole matter clear it is admitting the King to have taken an Oath in the words mentioned by the Members it rather proves the Kings power of a negative Voice then disproves it But the Members I am confident know that the King neither did nor was oblieged to take the aforesaid Oath The King pursuing former presidents recorded in the Exchequer tooke the Oath in words and according to the Ceremony as followeth viz. After the Sermon is done the King ariseth and goeth to the Altar and there the Archbishop administreth these questions And the King Answereth Bishop Sir will you grant and keep and by your Oath confirme to the people of England the Laws and Customes to them granted by the Kings of England your Lawful Religious Predecessors And namely the Laws Customes and Franchizes granted to the Clergy by the glorious King S. Edward your Predecessor according to the Laws of God the true profession of the Gospel established in this Kingdom and agreeable to the Prerogative of the Kings thereof and the ancient Customes of the Realme King I grant and promise to keep them Bishop Sir will you keep peace and godly agreement intirely according to your power both to God the holy Church the Clergy and the people King I will keep it Bishop Sir will you to your power cause Law Justice and discretion in mercy and truth to be executed in all your Judgements King I will Bishop Sir will you grant to hold and keep the Laws and rightfull customes which the Commonalty of this your Kingdome have And will you defend and uphold them to the honour of God so much as in you lieth King I grant and promise so to doe Then one of the Bishops reads this admonition to the King before the people with a loud voice Our Lord and King we beseech you to pardon and to grant and to preserve unto us and to the Churches committed to our Charge all Canonicall priviledges and due Law and Justice And that you would protect and defend us as every good King in His Kingdomes ought to be protector and defender of the Bishops and the Churches under their government King With a willing and devoute heart I promise and grant my pardon and that I will preserve and maintaine to you and the Churches committed to your Charge all Canonicall priviledges and due Law and Justice And that I will be your protector and defender to my power by the assistance of God as every good King in His Kingdome in right ought to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under their government Then the King ariseth and is led to the Communion table where he makes a solemne Oath in sight of all the people to observe the premises And laying His hand upon the Booke saith The things which I have before promised I shall performe and keep so help me God and by the Contents of this Booke Now for the King to oblish Episcopacy to destroy the whole Government of the Church established by Law for the King so far as in Him lies to transfer unto His Subjects that regall power which is inherently in His Person to change the Monarchicall Government into a confusion to reduce his Subjects being a freeborne people unto a perpetuall slavery under their equals and fellow Subjects certainly cannot stand with this Oath All which in the proposals made to Him by the Members nay more and worse then words can expresse is required and by most Barbarous and inhumane cruelties attempted to be forced from Him Now having done with this Oath I shall proceed further to examine the legality of the Members doctrine to exclude the King from His negative Voice It is an undoubted maxime in every Law that no Person Court or Assembly can Act or do any thing concerning the publike affaires of the Kingdome or Common-wealth without Commission which stands with all the reason in the world else it followeth that every one hath equall power to make Laws Act and do what he thinks fit And by the constitutions of this Realme every Person Court or Assembly must derive its authority by one of these wayes viz. by the Kings grant by Act of Parliament or by custome and use if by the Kings grant the Patent it selfe declares the persons authorised if by Act of Parliament the Statute names the men if by custome and use that use and custome is their Commission For example if the King by His Commission authorize twenty persons or any ten of them whereof A. B. or C. to be one to determine a felony if seventeen of the twenty in the absence of A. B. and C. execute that Commission all their proceedings are void as done without Commission seventeen strangers not named in the Commission might as well act therein as they And if the Commission be by Act of Parliament none can execute that Commission but those authorized by the Statute And the like holds when custome and use is the Commission unlesse that custome and use warrant the persons to act it is done without authority and so void Then for the point in question The Members of the two Houses have no grant from the King nor is there any Act of Parliament to enable them to make Laws nor doth custome warrant it For untill this Parliament they never made Law without and against the Kings consent nor claimed power so to do But say the Members in the foresaid Declaration If there be not an agreement between His Majesty and His Parliament either His Majesty must be Judge against His Parliament or the Parliament without His Majesty for say they that question whereupon the safety of the Kingdome depends must not be undetermined And say they if His Majesty against His Parliament why not as well of the necessity in the question of making a Law without and against their consent as of denying a Law against their desire and advise The Judge of the necessity say they in either case by like reason is Judge in both Besides say they if His Majesty in this difference of opinions should be Judge He should be Judge in His owne case But the Parliament should be Judge between His
is none either to umpire or mediate between the Members and the people And so the Members by this have assumed an arbitrary power Nor doth this power of a negative Voice in the King take away or lessen the authority of any Court of Justice Every Court of Judicature pursuing its Commission hath power to determine the interest both of King and people and that without assent either of King or Member The knowne Law is their ground to judge by not the opinion of the King or of either or both Houses Nor can the King in this be said to Judge out of his Courts or against the two Houses of Parliament for the King and the two Houses have herein equall power that is every one of them a negative Voice they are all together joyntly Judge of that high Court of Parliament but no one or two of these bodies is Judge thereof So that by the Kings and either Houses having a negative Voice it cannot be said they Judge each other out of that or any other Court of Justice But some object that if the refusall of the King shall hinder the making of Laws the Common-wealth is in danger to suffer for say they the King may be refractory and deny to passe good Laws Answer No humane Law can preserve a Common-wealth from every mischief That Law which avoideth the most inconveniencies is the best Law It is granted that the will of the King or of either House by refusing to passe a Law propounded may prove mischievous But upon pretence of necessity to give power to the King and either House or both Houses without the King to alter the Law or to make new Laws were more dangerous If that rule serve them to make good Laws it enables them to make bad ones too If they be Judge when to make one Law they are Judge to make as many and what Laws they please they who have this power may declare what they list to concerne the safety of the Kingdome Once breake this rule That no new Law can be made with consent of the King and the two Houses and there is no end of the distraction Upon the same ground that the Lords and Commons in the case of the Militia pretending a necessity and that the King was refractory assumed power to make Laws without Him the Lords House may exclude both King and Commons the Commons House Lords and King or the King both Houses When there ariseth a difference between the King and the two Houses if it be of necessity that the King or the two Houses must so far Judge the businesse as to make a Law without the other by the same reason when a difference happens between the two Houses one of them must be Judge against the other and make a Law without the others consent for such a difference between the two Houses may as well happen to concerne the safety of the Kingdome as when the difference fals out between the King and both Houses And if either House obtaine the sole power to make Laws still there is no period for if reason or reall necessity require it and should be Judge when and what Laws are to be made the lesser number of one of those Assemblies peradventure may be in the right But whether right or wrong the zelots may chance to side with the little flock rise up and in tumults call it Justice And so consequently the good Law of the Land destroyed and club-law introduced and the very being of Parliaments taken away whereas by observing the constitutions of the Realme in submitting this power of making Laws to the Judge thereof that is the King without the assent of the two Houses all these absurdities and inconveniences are avoided Which constitution being rightly understood is grounded upon great reason and is most equall between King and people for the Commons House upon just grounds for any thing to them appears may passe a Bill which the Lords upon as just reasons may reject the Members of that Assembly being persons who for the most part have a greater deeper reach insight in State affaires And both Houses may passe a Bill conceiving it necessary for the preservation of the Kingdome to have it made a Law and thereupon desire the Kings consent which the King may as justly reject And for such reasons they may be matters of that nature as not convenient and most unfit to be imparted and revealed to such a multitude as the seven hundred Members or more of both Houses But when all that is when the King and the two Houses concur the Common-wealth may as safely depend upon it as upon any humane institution Upon these grounds it is that when a dispute happeneth concerning the making of a Law the King being of one opinion the Lords of another and the Commons of a third or when any one of the three bodies dissent from the other two there is no umpire but themselves to end that controversie nor can they decide the question by any other way but by a joint agreement or quitting the dispute for untill a joint concurrence of all three their proceedings are but conferences and their results what they would have to be Lawes but no Laws indeed untill by consent of all three they be reduced to Acts of Parliament No Order Ordinance or what ever it is or shall be called made by consent of any one or two of these bodies alone hath the strength or force of a Law our Law takes no notice thereof like a verdict for life lands or goods in which case the major part of the Jury determineth not the question all twelve must agree else it is no verdict for the question being fact some one of the Jury may have better knowledge thereof then all the rest So in this case by the constitutions of the Realme no new Law can be made or the old altered without a joint concurrence of the King and the two Houses It is that united body which at this day as to the Legislative power represent the whole Kingdome The Members of the Commons House alone do not in that manner represent the Commons of England the Lords the Peers and the King for Himself but all together do represent the whole Kingdom no one or two of these bodies can herein be said to represent only any part every common person doth herein by the Laws of England asmuch depend upon the judgement of the King and the Lords as upon the Members of the Commons House And so do the King and the Lords upon those Members for the King the Lords and Commons as now by consent of former Kings it is setled are herewith joyntly trusted As if three Lords authorize three severall persons to sell their Lands if two of them sell it binds not therefore in judging that sale void no man is injured the Lords are seized of their Lands as before and the persons trusted have the same power that is
joyntly concurring to sell and by that sale the Lords are concluded it is done by the Commission of those Lords and therefore in Judgement of Law their owne Act. So for the Parliament the King the Lords and Commons by the constitutions of this Realme are jointly trusted to consent unto the making new or changing the old Law therefore no lesse then all have Commission for it And so if the King and either House or both Houses without the King passe a Bill or make a Law this ought to be judged invalid none are thereby wronged still the knowne Laws are in force the people as before by the knowne Law are protected in their persons and estates and those trusted that is the King the Lords and Commons joyntly concurring have power to make new Laws which consent concludes the whole Nation it is done by its representative body and so by their Commission Thus it appears that when there is a question and dispute in Parliament between the King and the two Houses it is not necessary to have it affirmatively determined nor needfull that His Majesty in such cases be Judge against the two Houses or the two Houses to Judge it without Him That is but a fiction of the Members devised by them to reduce the Nation unto their Tyranny which as the Members knew they could not effect but by excluding the King from His negative Voice in Parliament so that being done their worke was finished Then they without the King arrogate power to make new Laws and change the old for their owne advantage as they pleased And so both King and people inslaved Therefore herein to beguile the people a case was faigned and stated thus That such a difference between the King and the two Houses as concerned the safety of the Kingdome was happened in Parliament That unlesse this question were instantly determined the Kingdome was in danger to perish Then to draw the people to side with the Members they were told that the Lords and Commons were the representative body of the Kingdome That whatever the Members in those Assemblies do it is so much the Act of every particular person in the Kingdome as if he were within the wals of the House personally consenting And perswaded the vulgar that this dispute between the King and the Members in effect is between Him and all the people of England And then offer it to the consideration of the multitude whether it be not more likely that all the people of the Realme concurring in one opinion should better know what is for their owne good then the King being but one single person and dissenting in judgement from the whole Nation The poor people not being of capacity suddenly to discerne the fallacy hereof And being ravished with a conceipt to be Judge in their owne case in smarmes flocked to this Idoll the Members thinking they had thereby adored themselves as well as that beast and never ceased untill by violence they expelled the King from His negative Voice in Parliament But now by wofull experience they both understand by whom and how they are represented which is thus The Knights of Shires Citizens and Burgesses being elected by the Inhabitants of the severall Counties and Townes do in some sort represent the people who chose them but that is no further then their Cōmission extends And they have no other Commission then the Kings Writ of Summons the returne thereof word by word set downe before which gives them no other authority then to consent unto Laws agreed on by the King His great Councell the Peeres consequently they do represent the people no further then to consent unto such Laws And for the Peeres they have no Commission at all from the people nor can be said to represent them their authority is solely from the Kings said Writ of Summons directed to every particular Lord by which likewise his power is declared and stinted That is to advise with the King concerning the affaires of the Realme So that the Lords and Commons put together they have no Commission to make Laws we are still to seeke that Legislative power nor is it to be found but in the King He alone is properly the Law-maker But the Kings of England as before appears having excluded themselves to make Laws without consent of the two Houses Therefore that united body the King and the Members of those Assemblies is called the Legislative power and the representative body of the Kingdom But that either or both Houses or any Assembly or people in this or any other Nation governed by Monarchy hath or ever claimed to have a Legislative power or sofar to represent the Kingdome as to make new Laws or change the old without the Personall consent of the King is such a ridiculaus Bull as never was heard or thought of untill this frantick Parliament Therefore when either or both Houses without the King take upon them to make Laws they extend beyond the bounds of their Commission they thereby act of their owne head not as representatives For example a Lord by Commission gives power to A. and B. to let and set his Land for tearme of years so long as A. and B. pursue this authority they do represent that Lord but if by colour of that Commssion A. and B. demise for life or sell the Inheritance it is done without authority their Commission reacheth not so far and so not representatives Therefore such lease or sale is void it doth not bind the Lord. Or thus A. having contracted with B. to make A. feoffement unto him and his heirs of the Mannour of D. upon a condition by letter of Atturney gives power to C. to make livery and seisin upon that Condition C. performes it In this case the Land is as firmely setled in B. as if A. had executed it in his owne person because it is done by his representative But if C. omitting to express the Condition make livery and seisin absolutely nothing passeth to B. for saith our Law C. extending the bounds of his Commission he doth not represent A. Therefore his whole act void So here the Lords as before appears have Commission to advise with the King the Commons to do and consent unto things agreed on by the King and them Now those Lords and Commons taking upon them without the Personall assent of the King to make new or change the old Law it is a power usurped without Commission or authority therefore no representatives and consequently all their proceedings void Then for the distinctions in the aforesaid Declarations mentioned 1. That no Law made without the Kings consent binds unless His consent be first required and refused 2. That those Laws be necessary for the preservation of the Kingdome 3. That such Laws shall continue no longer in force then that necessity lasteth these are snares and subtilties only to catch the simple no wise man wil be taken with them Suppose the King upon refusall
that Suppose it granted that the Iudges in that case of Ship-mony gave Sentence by corruption whereby about 200000. l. per annum was drawn from the people To conclude hereupon that we must from henceforth have no more learned men chosen Iudges is extreame harsh It might as well be argued thus The Members of the two Houses have erred in Iudgement and have been corrupt ergo we ought to have no more Parliaments For as before appeares the Members of former Parliaments have most grosly erred And for these present Members they have not only erred but have been in the highest nature corrupt too First They erred in Iudgement by assuming the Iustice seat the Soveraign power of Government and so in infinite other particulars Then for corruption since these Authorities were by them arrogated twice twenty times 200000. l. per annum illegally and barbarously drawn from the people doth not stint them They have corruptly by one Vote not onely given themselves the wealth of the whole Nation but have likewise enslaved both King and People for their lives and fortunes to their owne will But clear it is no constitution can avoid every mischiefe it is the best Law which prevents the most inconveniencies therefore in this case that which can be done is to have persons who are learned in the profession made Iudges of the Law and all possible care taken that they doe Iustice and for that by our Law no man is capable of a Iudges place unlesse he have ability to execute the same And although he be sufficient for learning yet being advanced for bribes or rewards he is by Law likewise disabled to performe the office They are sworne to do right to all persons and although error in judgement is no crime yet corruption in the Iudge be it for bribes affection malice desire of preferment fear or any other cause is by our Law an offence of an high nature and and most severely punished Now if in stead of exalting themselves the Members had as they made some shew for a while made inquiry how and by whom the Judges were drawne as the Members alleadge to give that corrupt sentence and had presented the same to the King to the end not onely exemplary punishment might have been inflicted upon them but they put out of their places and new Iudges elected the Members had done like Parliament men that had pursued their Commission And so whilst the King the Parliament the Judges every Court and Assembly retaine their owne proper authority without clashing with or encroaching each upon other As by the Laws of England they ought to do both King and Subject are preserved in their just rights And this ought to be exactly observed notwithstanding the superiority or inferiority of any Court power person or Assembly because one Court in some respect is superiour to another that takes not away nor lesseneth the proper jurisdiction of the inferior Court Scarce any inferior Court but it hath some powers which the superior Court hath not For example The Court of CommonPleas hath power between party and party to determine reall actions which the Kings Bench hath not The Assembly of the Commons House cannot give an oath yet the meanest Court of Justice even a Court of Pipowders hath that power So that if it were admitted that the two Houses of Parliament were a Court of Justice as it is not And that it were the highest Court of that nature in this Kingdome that would not at all make good their pretence to be the finall Judge of the Law from whom no appeale should lie But by this Vote and practise of the Members all Courts of justice and rightfull powers in the Kingdome are put downe the Law totally subverted and all things reduced to their arbitrary power Upon the whole matter clear it is that the Judges of the aforesaid three Courts are the Judges of the Realme and the persons unto whom all the people of this Nation are bound lastly and finally to submit themselves for matter of Law But notwithstanding all this the same necessity which made the Members exclude the King from His negative Voice and so to usurpe a boundlesse power to make Laws enforceth them to arrogate the Justice seate too For it were to little purpose for them to declare it Treason for a Subject to speake to His King and infinite such like grosse contradictions both to reason and the knowne Law and yet permit the rightfull Judges to determine the same questions that were both to exalt themselves up and at the same instant to cast themselves downe againe But they tell us they are no such babies So long as the people will be fooled nothing is more certaine but Tyrants they will be to us their slaves In the next place it is shewed who ought to nominate and authorize the Judges of the Realme CHAP. VI. That the Judges of the Realme ought to be elected and authorized by the King of England for the time being and by none else THe legall authorizing of the Judges of the Law is of that importance as upon it depends the preservation of the people for no Law no government no Judge no Law and if authorized by an illegall Commission no Judge It appears before that when the Iudge extends beyond the bounds of his Commission his proceedings are void as done coram non Judice Upon the same grounds be the words of the Commission never so large if the authority be derived from such as have not power to grant it the whole Commission is voide Yet Mr. Pryn by the authority of the Commons House hath published a Treatise intituled thus The Parliaments right to elect Privy Councellors great Officers and Judges Wherein he endeavours to prove the two Houses by the Laws of England ought to elect the Iudges And proceeds thus Kings saith he were first elected by the people and as he beleeves the people at the first elected the Judges and great Officers and bound them by publike Laws which appears saith he by infinite Acts of Parliament regulating both the power of the King and His Officers That in ancient time Lieutenant Generals and Sheriffs were elected by the Parliament and people That the Coroners Majors Aldermen of Corporations Constables and other such like officers at this day are elected by the people Knights of Shires and Burgesses are elected by the Commons of the Realme That the King can neither elect a Commoner nor exclude a Member of either House to sit or Vote That the Parliament consists of Honourable wise grave and discreet persons That although the Kings have usually had the election of great officers and Judges it hath rather been by the Parliaments permission then Concession That the Judges and Officers of State are as well the Kingdomes as the Kings And saith that Mr. Bodin a grave Politician declares That it is not the right of electing great officers which prove the right of Soveraignty because it oft
name but the power of Judges the knowne Law of the Land is their rule to determine every question depending before them which they are sworne to observe notwithstanding any command of the King the Members or any persons whatsoever And consequently every one is thereby preserved in his just Interest but by the Members taking upon them both to nominate the Iudges and to declare the Law the Law it selfe is destroyed and both King and people inslaved Upon the whole matter clear it is That the King and none else hath power to nominate and authorize the aforesaid Iudges and officers And therefore if the Members of the two Houses have or shall either in the Kings name or in their owne de facto appoint any persons for Judges in those Courts or in words by Commission of Oyer and Terminer or generall Gaole delivery give power to any to execute the office of Judicature in Circuits or otherwise such persons have not de Jure the power of Iudges For the Members have no more authority to make a Judge or to give any such power then any other subject in the Kingdome hath therein And consequently all the judgements acts and proceedings of those nominall Iudges or such Commissioners are void as things done coram non Judice Every person by such authority who either in the Kings Bench or at the Assises or elsewhere hath been or shall be condemned and executed for any crime whether guilty or not guilty is murdered And every other judgement or sentence by them given either in Capitall Criminall or Civill affaires is invalid In the next place it is proved that the King is the only Supreame Governour CHAP. VII That the King is the onely Supreame Governour unto whom all the people of this Nation in point of Soveraignty and Government are bound to submit themselves AGainst this undoubted right of the Kings these distractions have produced another Treatise of Mr. Pryns likewise published by authority of the Commons House intituled thus The Parliament and Kingdom are the Soveraigne power Wherein his aime is to perswade the people that the Members of the two Houses are the supream Governours of this Kingdom and begins thus The High Court of Parliament and whole Kingdome which it represents saith he may properly be said to be the highest Soveraigne power and above the King for saith he every Court of Justice whose Just resolutions and every petty Jury whose upright verdicts oblige the King may truly be said to be above the Kings person which it bindes But the Court of Parliament hath lawfull power to question the Kings Commissions Patents and Grants and if illegall against the Kings will to cancell or repeal them Therefore the Parliament hath Soveraign power above the King Answer Here I deny both his Major and Minor First for his Major Although it is true that every Just resolution of any Court of Justice That is when the Judges legally determine such things as regularly depend before them in point of Interest bindes the King as well as a Subject that proves not a Soveraigne power in the Judges If so it followeth that the Judges of the Kings-Bench the Common Pleas and of all other Courts of Justice And by M. Pryns Argument every petty Jury too have in point of Soveraignty a power above the King which is most grosly absurd So that admit the two Houses a Court of Justice which they are not and to have power legally to determine Causes which they have not That is nothing to Soveraignty It is one thing to have power to make Lawes another to expound the Law and to Governe the people is different from both The first appertaines to the King and the two Houses the second to the Judges and the third is the Kings sole right Neither the making declaring or expounding the Law is any part of Soveraignty But regulating the people by commanding the Lawes to be observed and executed pardoning the transgressors thereof and the like are true badges of a Supreme Governour All which are the Kings ☞ sAnd for his Minor take his meaning to be the true Parliament That is the King and the two Houses And it is false that the two Houses without the King have power legally to cancell or make voide any Commission Patent or Grant of the Kings For as before appeareth That united body cannot speak or doe any thing but by Act of Parliament To say the Parliament without the King may make a Law is as grosse a Contradiction as to affirme that the King may make an Act without the King And his meaning being taken to be the two Houses without the King In that sense the Members have herein no power at all for as before appeares they are neither a Parliament nor a Court of Iustice and consequently have not jurisdiction legally to cancell or repeale any Commission Patent or Grant of the Kings But saith Master Prin the King although he be cheif yet he is but one Member of the Parliament and saith he the greatest part of any politicke body is of greater power then any one particular Member As the Common-Councell is a greater power then the Major the Chapter then the Dean the Dean and Chapter then the Bishop and so the whole Parliament then the King for saith he in an Oligarchy Aristocrasie and Democrasie That which seemes good to the major part is ratified although but by one casting voice As in election of the Knights of the shire Burgesses and the Votes in the two Houses And saith he by the Lawes of England The Kings the Lords and Commons make but one intire Corporation and so concludes that the Major part of the Parliament which in Law saith he is the Corporation is above the King Answer There is scarce one word in this discourse but it is false or misapplied It appears before That the Parliament consists of 3 distinct bodies viz. the King the Lords House and the Commons House and in making Lawes which is all they have to doe they have but three Voices yet that which seemes good to the major part of these three is not ratified For as before it appeares they must all concurre else no Parliament It is true where the Government is Aligarchicall Aristocraticall or Democraticall the major part determines the Question But this is mis-applyed to the businesse in dispute concerning the Soveraign power Our Government is Monarchicall The people of England are not Governed by a Parliament The use of a Parliament as before appeares is onely in some things when necessity requires To alter the old or make new Lawes wherein the foresaid three bodies viz. the King the Lords House and the Commons House are joyntly trusted If Mr. Pryn be asked what he meanes by the Major part of that Corporation which he in this place calls the Parliament His Answer must be one of these viz. Any two of the aforesaid three bodies or else That the King the Lords and the Commons
Kings right Besides it is resolved in our books of Law that if all the people of England should break a League with a forraign Prince without the Kings consent the League were not broken And consequently by the Judgement of the Law the sole power of the Militia is in the King And with this agrees all the Authorities both of our Books of Law and History It was never for the space of 1700. yeares past questioned or disputed untill now by these Vsurpers injuriously wrested from the Crowne But the Members in the name of the Lords and Commons upon serious consideration have lately Voted to this effect That the Militia hath been long debated in black and red letters and that God hath now given his Verdict on their sides That however the English men please themselves with their Magna Charta and because their Lives and Estates are not at the Kings Will and for that He cannot make Lawes or raise money without consent in Parliament All this say they signifies nothing if the Militia be in the King for by that say the Members He may destroy the People For say the Members if there be a true intention to leave unto the People their knowne rights that no Law be made or Money levied to maintaine the Militia without their consent in Parliament It cannot inable Him to do the Kingdom effectually any good alone But may serve to make Him capable alone to do them hurt Answer Every man may be satisfied these men have spoke what they can to maintaine this their pretended Right yet these their Votes being duely examined every indifferent person will thereby rather think that the Devill himself who hath long owed them a shame hath now paid that debt then by these Votes be drawn to believe the Members Doctrine First for their supposed Verdict to be given by God himself Their Argument therein is sutable to that of the Jewes and Turks whose examples and presidents I presume they follow The Jewes even to this day audaciously scoffe and taunt us Christians for receiving Christ Jesus for our Messias because upon the Crosse he being required by them to manifest his authority by saving himself and thereupon then offering to believe his Doctrine which he did not Therefore the wicked Jewes concluded they could not And the Turkes for the space of 1000. yeares past to make good their Doctrine of Mahomet and their claime to be the only Monarch of the World much insult upon the Christians for their Victories obtained against them whereby we cannot deny but they doe possesse amongst infinite other Kingdomes and Countries wrested from Christian Kings the places both of the Birth and Passion of our Saviour And upon this the Turks infer that God hath Judged the cause for them against the Christians Now that difference which is to be found between the Arguments of the Jews and Turks and these of the Zelots at Westminster renders the latter to be the greater Blasphemous They althoughly wickedly protesting against Christ pursued their Conscience Neither Turk nor Jew for any thing appeares did know or believe Christ to be the Saviour of the World These hypocritically make use of the name of God himself and to establish themselves in their usurped possessions with insolent boldnesse call him to testifie nay affirme that God in this point of the Militia hath given his Verdict for them and against the King which themselves doe not only know but have acknowledged to be the Kings Right And having with this semblance of sanctity prepared the People with this forged Verdict Then they Vote reasons to perswade the vulgar That for the King to have the Militia tends to their destruction but that Authority being placed in the Members the people are if we may believe them secured from harme But of their owne shewing the expresse contrary Appeares First they tell us as the truth is that by the Laws of England the King hath not power by himself alone to tax or impose payments of money upon the Subject therefore say they mark this consequence so long as the Law is therein observed the Kings having of the Militia is not effectuall to the Kingdome Hence it followeth by the Members own Argument that if the King had an Arbitrary power then the Militia were his own So that by the Members Doctrine none but Tyrants have title to the power of the Sword which I confesse is a foundation aptly laid for their own structure All the world will witnesse for them that in point of Tyranny the malice of man with the advise and assistance of all the devils in hell cannot out-strip them Let the Members search Histories and Stories Presidents and Examples from the first Creation untill this Parliament and not onely of this Nation but throughout the face of the whole Earth and I defie the most vigilant amongst them to finde one Tyrannicall act which these Members since their usurpation upon the King have not done or audatiously claimed by the Law of the Land to have power to execute Thus appeares the different condition of the people concerning the Militia under the Kings Government and this under the Members By that under the King whilst the people submit unto their lawfull Superiors and obey the just Sentence of Law there is no need of the power of the Sword for the King neither hath nor claimes Authority by the Militia to force his Subjects to make payment of money or to doe any one thing more or otherwise then the known Law commands We are not Governed by the Will of the King but under Him according as the Law of the Land directs And the use of the Militia is no other then to preserve the Law And therefore in case of disobedience to compell submission thereunto wherein the power of the Sword that is the Militia is as necessary as the Law it self for as the people cannot be protected in their persons lives or estates without the Law so that Law is fruitlesse where there wants power to put it in execution Hence it followeth even by reason it selfe that he who hath the Soveraign power of Government hath as an incident inseperable unto it the power of the Sword And by our Law the King hath the Soveraignty From him as before appeares is due to the people protection of their persons and Estates That by the Lawes of England is implyed in the word King And so the word Subject implies a duty in the people to assist their King And as this duty is reciprocall between King and Subject so the performance thereof is equally beneficiall to both And if either faile in their duty both King and People are destroyed Therefore to deny our King the Militia of the Realme is no lesse an absurdity then to appoint a Generall of an Army with commands to fight an approaching Enemy and to deny that Generall use of Armes and power to command his Souldiers But on the other side to give
then was the condition of an English villaine at the beginning of this Parliament It is as bad nay worse then that under the Turke they have onely one Tyrant we seven hundred They one head over their whole body we two bodies without a head And as it is with us in Temporall affaires the same it is in Spirituall things too The Members have de facto abolished the Protestant Religion And both in doctrine and discipline force mens consciences how absurd or blasphemous soever it be to submit to their resolutions So that if the question be asked whether the scripture or the Church be Judge or how a man shall be informed of the truth These Tyrants make answer that neither Scripture nor Church is Judge of controversies but the two Houses We must no more search the Scriptures but submit our selves our souls and bodies to the Votes of the Major part of those two Houses and thus are the people slaves CHAP. XIV How the Subjects of England were brought unto this slavery IT is true the people of England for some time before this Parliament were grieved with illegall taxations Monopolizing of Trades and other things not warranted by Law And although there wants not meanes besides a Parliament to redresse any disorder arising in the Common-wealth yet the cause of the distempers may be such as that without a Parliament it would be difficult to reforme them When the Judges are corrupt as the Members alledged they were in that case of Ship-money when the Officers of State or other persons of power neere the King occasioned the mischiefe as it was conceived in the businesse of Monopolies few in the ordinary way of proceedings dare informe or prosecute Therefore in such cases a Parliament is necessary The Members in those things have freedome of speech And the King having called His Parliament at the first meeting thereof expressed Himself most sensible of the disorders of the Kingdome declared His desire to have a perfect reformation His resolution to governe according to the knowne Law such as were authors or actors of the former distractions he left them to legall tryall And to compleat the businesse promised to concur with the two Houses in all things tending to reformation Thus the Parliament had a happy beginning and for a good space of time a progresse sutable For such as looke upon the Statutes made this sitting shall find the worke of reformation even by the King Himselfe perfectly compleated That Judgement for Ship-money the busines of Monopolies and all other visible and Knowne greivances were taken away And to prevent the like danger for after-times the King passed an Act for calling a Parliament every third year So that to the obtaining of the greatest happinesse that any people in the world can desire there wanted nothing but to punish the authors of the former mischiefe and then for the present a dissolution of the Parliament Then might every one by observing a knowne Law have promised to himself security of his person and challenged property in his estate But the sequell shewes that it was not the publick good it was their owne private the government and wealth of the whole Nation the Members aimed at And as a foundation to it the plot was to make this Parliament perpetuall But at the first it not being thought fit to discover their intention therein it was pretended that the affaires of the Kingdome required instant supplies of great summes of money which as they pretended could not be obtained but by Loane And that the people fearing a suddaine dissolution of the Parliament would not lend A Bill therefore is cunningly formed not at all mentioning for what time the Parliament should sit in generall words enacting that it shall not be dissolved nor adjourned but with the assent of the two Houses And the King being informed by the hatchers of that plot that this Act was for no other end but to procure the Loane of money for the publick good passed the Bill The Members having obtained this Act and conceiving that thereby the King could not dissolve the Parliament without their consent then they began their intended worke From thence nothing is heard of in the old Parliamentary way The prosecution of the Judges in that heavy charge of corruption is not onely set aside but some of them formerly accused to be such high malefactors as to have subverted the knowne Law are received into the greatest favour as persons most proper to usher in the arbitrary power of the Members Then are the people amused with feares and jealousies by printed pamphlets they are grosly abused by being told that the King intended to subvert the Law and governe by His arbitrary power To abolish the Protestant Religion and to introduce Popery The Kingdome therefore it was resolved must be put into a posture of defence The Militia must be taken out of the Kings hands and setled in the Members And accordingly by their command the Kings subjects are mustered arrayed and put into a readinesse for War they are instructed and prepared to take upon them any enterprize the Members shall direct The Fortes the Navy the Armes Ammunition and Revenues of the Crowne are taken to the use of the Members Thus having prepared and strengthened themselves the next thing was further to disinable the King to make resistance It is therefore falsely and maliciously declared to the people that it is against the liberty of the Subject for any cause whatsoever unlesse upon an actuall invasion to be forced by the Kings command out of their owne County So that by this doctrine in case of a forraigne Invasion the enemy must be landed he must have footing in the Kingdome before the people may be gathered together by the King to make defence But in case of Rebellion the businesse in hand if the Rebels once get a formed body too strong for any one County the businesse is done They may if this be true doctrine undoubtedly conquer County after County the whole Kingdome These things being done it was then conceived opportunely and safe enough to publish and declare their intent Then without the King they arrogate the name of the Parliament of England take upon them to be the Supreame Court of Justice to make Laws and in a word a power arbitrary So that the Members have as an emprick by killing his patient with improper medicines cures his disease reformed this Common-wealth under pretence to restore the knowne Law The Law it selfe is by them totally subverted And that which is still more grievous the people were made voluntary instruments of this tragedy whilst they conceived they fought in defence of the Law and their owne Liberties they were therein their owne executioners They have embrued their hands in the blood of their fellow Subjects and by their victory have plunged themselves into the debts of slavery But these things being done in the name of a Parliament with some persons they
He is not Judge in His own case nor hath a power Arbitrary His Authority and interest is regulated by a known Law Thus appears the different condition of the people between that in the worst of times under the Kings Government and what they are now reduced unto under the men at Westminster So that if the people had onely exchanged that Government for this it had been miserable enough Therefore considering the blood which hath been spilt herein most irksome it must be to every honest soule to think thereof But still the peoples case is worse the former grievances under the King was no cause of their defection For before this War began they were reformed Ship-money and all grievances were taken away In a word the people had no other motive to draw their sword against their Soveraigne but thus They were by these incendiaries falsely told that the King meant not what he said nor intended to keep those Laws he had made But now every person thus seduced by his owne wofull experience finds that it was these persons at Westminster who meant contrary to what they pretended If he looke for the Protestant Religion freedome of conscience the Laws of the Realme Liberty of his person or property in his estate due unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subject not one of them is to be found But instead thereof he finds himselfe poore man catched in the Members net His conscience His life His Liberty His estate and fortune is now at their arbitrary power These things considered he that thinkes either of this world or of the world to come upon his soule or body if he love himselfe or his Country if he fear God or honour the King must instantly make one in this worke to restore that King to his Throne Thus for the persons who ought to apply the medicine the next is to know how it shall be done And for that although considering the calamities this Nation hath suffered in being brought to bondage To redeeme it againe may seeme difficult yet upon consideration had thereupon it appears to be a thing easily effected That of the Members in excluding the King opposed the Law Therefore could not be done but by War and force But this of restoring the King pursues the Law and so proclaimes peace And as the Members could not have usurped this power but by War so they cannot hold it but by force Instantly upon the Law having its free passage their Kingdome is at an end And to every War is absolutely necessary the peoples personall assistance and money to pay the Soldiers If either of these faile the War is ended And obvious it is that the persons at Westminster can have neither of them but from those whom by the same persons have been thus brought to thraldome So that to perfect all this worke if every one would do his duty there would be no danger of bloodshed Then there needed no weapons not doing would do the worke Therefore whether thou bee'st in armes or not obey thy King according to the Law make thy payments to whom by Law they are due pay no Excise Loanes Benevolences Assessements Tax Tollage or other new impositions by them laid upon thee And if these Usurpers require these things as due by Law Tell them it is contrary to their owne doctrine Wish them to read the Petition of right whereby the Lords and Commons in Parliament declared That the people ought not to be Taxed with payments of money but by Act of Parliament that is by the King the Lords House and the Commons joyntly concurring Put them in minde of their Declarations this Parliament wherein they call it pernitious â—â—…mpt to goe about to Tax the people by way of Excise That it is against the liberty of the Subject to be charged with payments of money otherwise then the knowne Law doth warrant that nothing is more horrid then to have Soldiers billited to force upon the people voluntary contributions or to have new Oathes put upon them Yet these and thousand more exactions laid upon thee against Magna Charta the Petition of right and the knowne Law thou maist charge them with And needs no other Judge to condemne them but themselves out of their owne mouthes And further for thy incouragement herein be assured that by this restauration of the King not onely the people of England obtaine their freedome but instantly thereupon ensueth peace and unity throughout all the Kings Dominions For by that the Kingdomes of England Scotland and Ireland are againe united The people will then with great joy and acclamation according to the foresaid just recognition of the Lords and Commons unto King James performe their duty unto this our King Charls And acknowledge Him according to the foresaid Oath of Supremacy their onely Supreame Governour Upon the whole matter so long as the people continue in this slavery they are not onely their owne wilfull tormentors but disobeyers of the Laws of God and man And by quitting themselves from bondage which is at every instant in their power to do they performe their duty to both FINIS ERRATA PAg. 8. lin 11. read or our p. 10. l. 20. r. his advice p. 12. l. 14. r. never had p. 15. l. 32. r. motives p. 28. l. 34. r. we having p. 30. l. ult r. without consent p. 32. l. 26. blot the first and. p. 39. l. 28. r. denied p. 48. l. 29. r. the Law and l. 31. r. can gaine p. 53. l. 9. r. have been p. 58. l. 4. r. I conceive p. 67. l. 14. blot out the last that p. 88. l. 11. r. le Roy savisera p. 98. l. 7. r. he could not p. 116. l. 26. r. sterne p. 118. l. 31. r. of this p. 121. l. 34. blot out and. p. 124. l. 12. r. one p. 127. l. 2. r. left 25. Febr. 1641. 27. Maii 1642. Vide Pref. Cok. 8. Report Preface to Cok. 4. Report Coke 9. fol. 75. Plo. 195. 319. Cokes Preface 4. Report Magna Chart. 9 H. 3. The Charter of the Forrest 9 H. 3. Stat. of Ireland 9 H. 3. Stat. of Merton made 20 H. 3. Stat. of Marlebridge made 52 H. 3. Westminst the 1. made 3 E. 1. Stat. of Bygamy made 4 E. 1. 6 E. 1. Stat. of Mortmaime made 7 E. 1. Articuli super Cart. 28 E. 1. Stat. of Escheators made 29 E. 1. Coke Calvins case b. Stat. 33. H. 8. cap. 21. Coke 8. fo 20. b. 12 H. 7. 20 H. 8. Dyer 59. 60. 34 E. 1. c. 1. Statute of Staple made 27 E. 3. 7 H. 4. cap. 15. 1 H. 5. cap. 1. Stat. 33 H. 8. cap. 21. Coke 8. fo 20. 11 H. 7. 27. 7 H. 7. 14. Dyer 59. 60. Co. 4. Inst p. 25. Stat. 24 H. 8. ca. 12. Coke 5. f. 28. Coke 8. fo 20. Coke 7. fo 36 37. 2 H. 7. 6. Co. 7. 14. Plo. 502. 〈◊〉 f. 59. p. 19. Coke 8. fo 20. 12 H. 7. 20 H. 8. Plo. 79 4 H. 7.
any one of these blessings If the major part of the Members require from thee thy life thy estate thy fortune thy friend or what ever else is most dear unto thee It is say they a breach of Priviledge of Parliament not to submit thy self to the block and render all to their lusts And if thou hast in this War acted against thy King thy case is still worse for by that War the Law is destroyed and so thou hast been an Instrument of thine owne and the Kingdomes ruine Yet of that faction against the King there be two sorts of people The one for self-ends against their owne knowledge the other misled and so pursuing although an erroneous one their owne conscience For those of the first ranke I feare like unto Judas their owne souls render themselves hopelesse of pardon which I presume like unto Catiline makes them judge themselves in no security but by attempting worse evils which doubtlesse begat that barbarous Vote and declaration of the Members not to make further Application to their King And for those of the latter ranke how far their following the dictamen of their owne conscience in point of Divinity may excuse them I will not dispute but certaine I am by the constitutions of this Realme in Temporall things it neither extenuates the crime nor mitigates the punishment In our Law it is a Maxime and a just one too Ignorantia Juris non excusat If not knowne the Law be a Plea or justification in facts of Treason murder felony trespasse or the like both King and people were without protection either of life person or estate It were easie for every Malefactor to pretend ignorance of the Law Therefore when the difference between the King and the two Houses first happened every Subject at his perill ought so far to have rectified his judgement as to have informed himself which side the Law obliged him to adhere unto yet not by that obliged to impossibilities for although most men in many particulars are unknowing of the Law every one even of the meanest capacity may as easily learne from whom he is to be informed thereof the Judges of the Realme as a sick man may find out where his Physitian dwels Now for want of so much consideration as to make enquiry whether by the Laws of England the King or the Members was therein to be obeyed that sort of people were surprised quitting their Allegeance to their King adhered to the Members their fellow Subjects and ingaged in this horred Rebellion Therefore in strictnesse of Law as guilty of Treason as those of the former ranke And thus by receding from that one principle in submitting to the true Iudge of the Law this desolation is come upon the whole Kingdome Had the King been suffered to enjoy his lawfull power of Soveraignty The Iudges of the Realme their Offfce of declaring the Law by which the King governs and the Parliament that is the King and the two Houses joyntly its proper authority viz. When necessity requires to make new Laws or change the old Had the Divines the Lawyers and especially the Members of the two Houses kept themselves within their owne spheares and every one submitted unto and obeyed his lawfull Superior the knowne Law of the Land had continued in force and consequently we had still been a most flourishing people But it is never too late to amend and if every one would herein begin at home the worke were instantly done but although it cannot be expected that all men will do their duty yet for those who were cheated into this Rebellion their judgements being once rectified it were not onely against the rules of charity but of reason likewise to conceive they should not with much more Zeal endeavour to restore the King and the people to their freedome then grounding upon an erronious conscience they prosecuted theirs and their owne confusion Now to shew that the honest vulgar people which are infinite in comparison of the Seducers were by the Incendiaries of these Westminster men intrapped into this Rebellion That by the Laws of the Land every mans onely true guide all the Subjects of the Realme ought in that War to have adhered unto the King That by the peoples disobedience therein the knowne Law is subverted and themselves inslaved That untill the King be restored unto His just rights the knowne Law set on foot and a submission to the true Judges thereof the people are not to hope for other then increase of misery And that by doing this which is both in their power and the peoples duty to performe is the scope of this Treatise And herein let none heretofore active against the King by reflecting upon the Law which as before appears doth judge him a Traytor be deterred from doing his duty That were in example of Judas to revenge themselves upon their owne persons They doe thereby become the Authors of their owne ruine for as we have the seate of then by attributing it to the Parliament Therefore much more is the arrogancy of the Members to claime that unlimited authoty without the King CHAP. V. That the Judges of the Kings Bench of the Common Pleas and the Barons of the Exchequer are the Judges of the Realme unto whom the people are bound lastly and finally to submit themselves for matter of Law p. 49. Wherein is shewed that the Members are neither qualified nor of a composier fit to Judge the Law And that if the King or the two Houses have that power the known Law is destroyed and the people inslaved CHAP. VI. That the Judges of the Realme ought to be elected and authorized by the King of England for the time being and by none else p. 64. Wherein it is shewed to be most preposterous for the Members to assume it And that all persons condemned and executed by their sentence or the sentence of their nominall Judges whether guilty or not guilty are murdered and all other proceedings void in Law CHAP. VII That the King is the onely Supreame Governour unto whom all the people of this Nation in point of Soveraignty and Government are bound to subject themselves p. 69. Wherein is shewed that Soveraigne power of Government power to make Lawes and power to judge the Law are three feverall things and by the constitutions of England ought to be in three severall hands The first is in the King the second in the King and the two Housis and the third in the Judges That the Members having usurped all these have destroyed the Law and inslaved the people CHAP. VIII That the Militia of the Kingdome by the knowne Law of the Land is inherent in the Crowne and at the absolute command of the King and none else p. 89. Wherein is shewed the true use of the Militia the grosse absurdity of the Members claime thereunto And that their usurpation herein hath undone the Kingdome CHAP. IX That all persons who have promoted this War in the
Authority the power to pardon the transgressours thereof and Authority to dispence with the Law it selfe is totally in Him for example if by Act of Parliament it be made felony or other crime to transport any commodity beyond the Seas the King after the fact committed may pardon the offence and before it be committed by His Letters patents without assent of the Members may by a non abstante dispence with the Law it self and legally Authorize any person notwithstanding that Statute to Transport that prohibited commodity and so in all publike and penall Acts not prohibiting malum in se Thus it appears that originally the Parliament consisted of the King calling to Him for their advice such as He thought fit But now by consent of former Kings as aforesaid no new Law can be made or the old altered or abrogated but by the King with the assent of the two Houses And so the King and the Members of these two Assemblies joyntly concurring at this day are the Parliament Upon which it consequently followeth that the King hath an absolute negative Voice in every Law to be propounded But in regard this is now not onely denied but a power usurped by those Members without the King to make Laws in the next place that point is more fully debated CHAP. III. That the Members of the two Houses have not power in any one particular to make a new Law or to change the old The King of England for the time being having an absolute negative Voice therein AGainst this I have seen a Treatise published by Order of the House of Commons in the name of William Pryn an utter Barrister of Lincolns Inne intituled thus viz. That the King hath no absolute negative Voice in passing Bils of common right and justice for the publike good And to make good his position proceeds to his proof in this manner The King saith he in most proceedings in Parliament as in reversing judgements damning Patents and the like hath no casting Voice 2. That Kings in ancient time have usually consented to Bils for the publicke good else gave such reasons of their deniall as satisfied both Houses 3. That Kingdomes were before Kings and then the people might have made Laws 4. That the King may die without heire and thereby the people may have such power againe 5. That the Lord Protectour in the infancy of a King may confirme Bils and so make Laws 6. That in Countries where Kings are elective and so an interregnum the people in the vacancy of their King may make Laws 7. That the two Houses have frequently denied to grant the King Aide by Subsidies 8. That the Kings of this Realme have been forced to give their Royall assent to Bils as in that of Magna Charta This is the substance of his objections and arguments against the Kings negative Voice in Parliament Answer M. Pryn hath spared no labour to make good his assertion fetching his arguments from a time supposed by him before Monarchy here began secondly upon accidents happening since this Monarchy And then imagineth a time to come that is when the King and all the bloud Royall of England shall be extinct for want of an heire at Law to inherit the Crowne First for his far fetched argument Kingdomes saith he were before Kings These words taken in their literall sense imply a grosse and absurd contradiction and he might as well say that servants were before Masters or the Son before the Father But doubtlesse Mr. Pryns meaning is that Countries and people were before they had Kings over them yet his words being so expounded make nothing to his purpose suppose that before Monarchy began in this Nation the people had been governed by a known Law to conclude thereupon That the Members of the two Houses at this day have power to make Laws without the King or that the King hath not a negative Voice in Parliament is to no more purpose then if he should say The Earth was made before it was peopled Ergo there is neither man woman nor child in the world or thus This Nation was peopled before they were governed by a Law Ergo the people neither had either Law or government The Jews upon the like ground may argue thus viz. our Religion was before Christ Ergo the people at this day ought not to professe Christian Religion But Mr. Pryns argument is more absurd he cannot shew that the people of this Nation before they were governed under Kings had either Literature known Law or Government However cleere it is This Nation hath been Monarchiall above 1200. years before the institution of the two Houses of Parliament And so Mr. Pryns argument that Kingdomes were before Kings is no weight at all to prove That the two Houses have power to make Laws without the King And much like unto it is his argument That the King may die without heire for if that should happen saith Mr. Pryn the people might make what Laws they should thinke fit Now thereupon he concludes thus Ergo the Members at this day have power without the King to make Laws With more reason the King might argue thus All the lands in England mediatly or immediatly are held of the King and if the owners die without heire by the Laws of the Realme Escheats to the Crown and so becomes at the Kings disposall but every man may die without heire Ergo all the lands in England at this present are the proper inheritance of the King No Lawyer can deny major or minor yet the conclution thereupon is absurd But in Mr. Pryns case admit the King should die without heire although it be granted that the people had thereby power to make Laws yet grosse it were to conclude upon it That the Members of the two Houses might so do For if the King and that Stem Royall were extinct without issue the two Houses would be extinct too By the Law of England if the King die during a Parliament ipso facto the Parliament is dissolved because the King who was head to advise with whom and by whose Writ and command the Members were summoned is dead Yet in that case the successour King if he please might call a new Parl. But when the King dies without heire there is no succeding King to summon it And so the constitution of Parliament and the whole Law and Government the fountaine of all which being stopped would be suspended if not ended and the people left without Law Then it might be granted Mr. Pryn That the strongest party concurring in that case would governe yet that is no proof that the Members had thereby power to make Laws And therefore more absurd it is to conclude upon Mr. Pryns reason That the two Houses at this day whilst the King and the blood Royall are in being have that power Then for his objections upon Authority or presidents happening since the beginning of the English Monarchy Kings saith he
Majesty and the Kingdome as they are in many if not in all cases And say they if His Majesty should be Judge He should be Judge out of His Courts and against His highest Court which He never is But the Parliament should onely Judge without His Personall Assent which as a Court of Judicature it alwayes doth and all other Courts as well as it And say they if the King be for the Kingdome and not the Kingdome for the King and if the Kingdome best knoweth what is for its owne good and preservation and the Parliament be the representative Body of the Kingdome it is say they easie to judge who in this case should be Judge But say they it it not so easie to understand what is the danger of unsetling by this meanes the security of all mens estates Is this danger say they kept of us by His Majesties single Vote And all mens estates without security and exposed to an arbitrary power because in all Courts of Justice and in the Court of Parlialiament and that without any appeale from it mens estates and interests are Judged without His Majesties Personall Assent But say they we do not say this as if the Royall Assent were not requisite in the passing of Laws nor doe nor ever did we say that because His Majesty is bound to give His consent to good Laws presented to Him by His people in Parliament that therefore they shall be Laws without His consent or at all obligatory saving only for the necessary preservation of the Kingdome whilst that necessity lasts and such consent cannot be obtained Answer Here with much art and cunning it is endevoured to misleade the people And for that purpose the true question is declined and other questions raised which at the first sight may to the vulgar seeme plausible When a difference happens say the Members between the King and the Houses and thus in a thing which concerns the safety of the Kingdome it must not rest undetermined therefore say they either the King must be Judge against the Houses or the Houses must be Judge against the King and conclude for themselves But the case being rightly stated and the constitutions of the Realme duly considered every rationall man will conclude that this power being granted the Members all the rest of the people of England are of a free Subject become absolute slaves which is thus This Nation is governed by a knowne Law which hath its prescribed rules therefore as before I said it may be necessary in some things to alter the old and make new Laws And that being so some knowne persons must Judge when necessity requires such a change and consequently untill those persons have so judged it all the people ought to conclude there is no need to alter the Law And by the Laws of England as before is said the King and the two Houses are that Judge no major part it is all joyntly who have that power As if A. seised of Lands upon his marriage is tied not to sell without the consent of B. and C. in this case A. B. or C. may negatively hinder the sale but it were absurd to conclude thereupon that A. B. or C. or any two of them have power to sell but most injurious it were upon that ground to give power to B. and C. to sell the Lands of A. without his personall consent So in this case the Kings of England have debarred themselves from making or changing the Laws without assent of the two Houses whereby the King the Lords House or the Commons House hath power negatively to hinder the making of any new Law or changing the old but it followeth not therefore the King the Lords or Commons or any two of those bodies have power to make a Law The difference is no lesse then between the having and not having a known Law The one imports the settlement of a knowne Law and preserves it and the other introduceth an arbitrary government For example if the King hath power to make what Laws He thinkes fit He may at pleasure bereave the Subject of life and confiscate their estates But now having a knowne Law and thereby protected in our persons and estates the King having a negative Voice to hinder the changing of that Law there ensueth no such evill consequence And the same holds with the members the Lords House and the Commons House having each of them a negative Voice to hinder the changing of the Law or making a new Law doth not lessen the peoples protection of their persons nor alters the property of their estates The knowne and setled Law still preserves both But admit one or both Houses without the King to make what Laws they please it followeth they have power to put to death whom and for what cause they thinke fit and for their owne use to seise and dispose of their estates their will is then the Law So that to give this power to the King alone or to one or both Houses without the King the consequence is equally evill If the King have it both Law and Parliaments are destroyed If the Members Monarchy the Parliament and the Law it selfe are totally abolished And if the King by having this power of a negative Voice be Judge in His owne cause the Members having that authority are so too But that is a meere fiction neither King nor Members by having a negatie Voice in Parliament are Judges in their own cause but all that is to say the King and the Houses are jointly Judges when it is fit to make a new Law or change the old And so long as they extend not beyond the power of a negative Voice the Members of the two Houses are persons indifferent between the King and the people and so is the King indifferent between the Members and the people For example if the King propound a Law to take away the life of His subjects to tax them with payments of money not warranted by the knowne Law or otherwise to inlarge His Prerogative the Members may assent thereunto and so make it a Law or refuse it and herein they are indifferent between King and people for the benefit of those Laws thus propounded accrues not to them And so it is if either or both Houses propound a Law to the King whereby they would assume to themselves the absolute power of Government to put to death whom they please to tax or impose upon the people to confiscate their estates to their own use the King is a person indifferent between the Members and the people to Judge whether to passe it or not But when the Members without the King assume power to make Laws the dispute between the King and the people is ended the businesse is then immediately and totally between the Members and the people Therefore by excluding the King from His negative Voice the Members have made themselves Judges in their owne case By our wofull experience we now find there
is and may be in the Subject Answer Although his whole discourse is either false or impertinent yet his saying that Kings were first elected by the people That the people as he beleeves elected the Judges and bounded them by publike Laws And for proof positively affirming although not naming one Act That all this appears by infinite Acts of Parliament regulating the King and His officers The vulgar may thereby conceive that the Members of the two Houses without the King have made Acts of Parliament That by those Acts it appears That the people elected the first King of England and the Judges and bounded them by publike Laws Although Mr. Pryn himselfe well knowes that never any Act of Parliament was or could be made without the Kings expresse consent And that the people of this Nation have been governed under Kings 1200. years before the first Act of Parliament at this day extant So that if Mr. Pryn had made his Argument according to the truth of the fact it had been but thus After King H. 3. begun his reigne and not before the Kings of England have made some Laws by Act of Parliament whereby in some things they have regulated their owne authority and the power of their officers and Judges Ergo the people although we had Kings 1200. years before that elected the first King the Judges and bounded them by publike Laws Besides admit the people had elected the first King and the Judges That nothing proves that the Members of the two Houses at this day by our Law outgh to nominate the Judges And for the rest of his Arguments they are to this effect A question being asked who ought to elect the Judges Mr. Pryn saith Leiutenant Generals and Sheriffs were anciently elected by the Parliament and people Colonels Majors Aldermen Constables Knights of the Shire and Burgesses are elected by the people Kings cannot elect a Member or exclude him from sitting That the Members are honourable grave and wise That the Judges are the Kingdomes as well as the Kings That although the Kings have usually had the election of them perchance it was by usurpation and Mr. Bodin a great Polititian saith that the election of these officers may be and often are in the Subject Now hereupon to conclude Ergo By the Laws of England the Members of the two Houses ought to elect the Judges I cannot more aptly parallel the Argument then thus How many miles to London Answer a poke full of plums Ergo it is 20. miles to London upon this it might as well have been concluded 40. 100. or 1000. miles to London as 20. and so for electing the Judges upon any of Mr. Pryns reasons or upon all together admitting them all true It might with as much sence and reason have been concluded thus Ergo the Major of Quinborough the great Turke or the man in the Moon ought to elect them Besides the Members of the two Houses cannot have the election of the Judges for these reasons First the Chancery the Kings Bench the Common Pleas and the Court of the Exchequer are Courts of Justice by prescription they were instituted before the time of memory none knows the beginning thereof but certaine it is they were Courts of Iustice before the House of Commons had being Secondly as it is necessary that the Iudges of the Law be knowne persons It is as requisite that such as elect them should be constantly visible But the Members out of Parliament are invisible Thirdly suppose it enacted That none that shall be a Iudge unlesse elected by A. and B. It were no wonder for them irreconcileably to differ in their choice And the two Houses are as distinctly two as A. and B. That difference which is renders the Members more improper for the worke and consequently not of a Composier fit to elect the Iudges And that this is the Kings right is made good thus First It appears before that those Courts have had Judges time out of mind And so long as any may can shew or prove there hath been Judges of those Courts so antiently the Kings of England and none else have elected and authorized them which is the strongest proof in the Law It is the Law it selfe It were absurd for any man to deny that it is felony to steale or that the eldest son is heir to his Fathers land yet there is no other proof to make it good but use and practise And the Kings have as antiently and constantly elected the Iudges as theft hath been punished or that the eldest son hath by discent enjoyed his fathers land Secondly if this King hath not right to elect the Iudges no former King had it and consequently we never had one Judge rightly authorized So that Mr. Pryn hath found out a point in Law which at once makes a nullity of all former proceedings in those Courts as things done coram non Judice But this not all If Mr. Pryns doctrine be true we have had no Parliament for the Kings not having power legally to authorize the Lord-keeper all creations of Peeres are void and so the Writs for electing the Knights and Burgesses were illegall and void too And consequently Mr. Pryns Law admitted there is no Member of either House Lawfully authorized to sit or Vote And for authority of bookes either Law or History I dare be bold to say there is not one man in the World untill the sitting of these Members who hath upon any occasion mentioned these things but hath delivered it as a fundamentall ground and a positive truth That the authority to elect the Iudges is in the King alone So thatsuch as are unsatisfied of the Kings right herein may with as much reason doubt whether we have had a King Law or government Nothing can herein be alledged against the King or on the Members behalfe unlesse a new maxime of Law be started up That no proof be it never so clear is sufficient to entitle the King to any Interest or authority But for the Members although they have neither authority use practise president or reason to make it good have title and interest to what they list But if the two Houses have the finall power to judge the Law and that every one who shall dispute their Votes break the priviledge of Parliament It matters not who hath the election of them nor who are chosen If the man be flexible enough the meanest capacity in one dayes study and with the expence of one single penny may be sufficiently compleat for a States Judge his Library needs not consist of more bookes then a copy of the Houses Votes whereby we are declared breakers of the priviledges of Parliament to deny that to be Law which they declare so to be For by these Votes we have no Law but the Members will And consequently those persons they call Iudges are no other but their Ecchoes But the true Judges authorized by the King have not only the
Roy le veilt So that if any difference be the Kings words are more prevalent for before that it is but a written piece of parchment not valid but by tht Kings words instantly it hath life and is become a Law binding the whole Kingdome and people And this as before is said is the Kings Law Then Mr. Pryn fals to presidents which he cals proofs King Ed. 2. and King R. 2. saith he were deposed by the Parliament Answer The case concerning these two Kings was thus Against King Ed. 2. after many distractions in the Kingdome the Queen His Wife and other of Her adherents increased the faction raised a Rebellion barbarously tooke the King prisoner and during His imprisonment without any lawfull authority or consent of the King in His name summoned a Parliament and by force drew him in words to resigne His Crowne unto His Son afterwards King Ed. 3. and that of King R. 2. was much to the like purpose He was drawne to resigne His Crowne to H. of Bullingbrooke Afterwards King Hen. 4. and these two lawfull Kings being thus injuriously bereft of their Scepters were shortly after most barbarously murdered too The whole proceedings of which Acts all such Pryn excepted as have mentioned them have condemned the same not onely to be illegall but as Acts most wicked and notoriously impious But saith Mr. Pryn Pierce Gaveston and the two Hugh Spencers were by Parliament banished the Spencers violently put to death Humphrey Duke of Gloucester arrested of high Treason at a Parliament at Berry and there murdered That the Earle of Strafford this Parliament lost his head against the Kings will Answer For the banishment of Gaveston and the two Spencers his Argument is but thus The King with the assent of the two Houses made an Act of Parliament to banish them Ergo the two Houses without the King have the Soveraigne power of Government And admit Mr. Pryn hath proved which he endeavours that the Members of the two Houses murdered the Duke of Gloucester and the Spencers still that proves not the Soveraigne power of government to be in the Members That example of the late Bishop of Canterbury I conceive to be a President far more proper to be cited for this purpose then the case of the Duke of Gloucester or the Spencers For all men know that Bishop was put to death by no other authority then by order of the two Houses yet this no more proves the Soveraigne power to be in the Members then that murder acted by Felton upon the person of the Duke of Buckingham proves Felton to be the King of England For the Members of the two Houses had no more authority to condemne to death the Bishop then Felton had to kill the Duke And consequently the murder of the Bishop whatever his offence was or however guilty it â—â—…ing done by pretext and colour of Law was more horrid And for the Earle of Strafford it was thus By the Laws of England no man can or ought to be convict of a crime but by Act of Parliament by utlagare or by triall of his Peeres That is if a Lord of the Parliament by a Jury of Lords if under that degree by a Jury of like quality and being convict the Judge ought to give no other sentence but what the knowne Law doth pronounce for that fact Now that Earle by the Members of the Commons House was accused of high Treason The King thereupon declared His resolution not to protect him from the tryall or just sentence of the Law After this the Members waving the ordinary proceedings of the Law passed a Bill to attaint him of Treason by Act of Parliament This Bill was presented to the King He for some time refused to make it a Law which peradventure He might be induced unto by the Bill it selfe There being a speciall proviso therein that the Judges shall not condemn any other for the like offences which might cause the King to be very tender of passing the Act thereby to condemne a man as a Traytor for facts passed which at the time committed was not Treason This if duely considered is so far from being evill in the King as that the whole Kingdome hath thereby great cause to acknowledge his goodnesse It hereby appears he desired to governe as King not as a Tyrant to proceed against offenders according to the knowne Law not by an arbitrary power And if some particular persons too much thirsting after Straffords blood occasioned such things as might draw the King against His conscience to consent unto that Act woe be unto them But however whether the King passed this Act willingly or against His will or whether the Earle of Strafford were guilty or not guilty of Treason That nothing proves that the Members have Soveraigne power of government above the King Thus for Mr. Pryns objections against the Kings right to Soveraignty And that the Members have no authority therein is further proved thus 1. So long as the people have been governed by a knowne Law there must have been a Supreame Governour but we have had the same Law by which we are now governed long before the Institution of the two Houses 2. It is absolutely necessary that the supreame Governour be a person constantly permanent and visible but the Members out of Parliament are not in being they are invisible 3. It is a contradiction to Soveraignty to be subject to the commands of an other But the Members are called together and dissolved againe at the Kings pleasure 4. The Composier of the Members is such As that to make them supreame Governours tends to the destruction not to the preservation of the Kingdome and people If a woman bring forth a Monster not having the shape of man-kind our Law judgeth it no issue it is lawfull to kill it it ought not to be baptized To have two heads of one body is monstrous so to have two Kings of one Kingdome must be destructive to that Nation But here which is a far more prodigious monster we by the Members usurpation are governed by two severall distinct bodies consisting of multitudes without any head This government is new there yet never was the like upon the face of the earth It is not Monarchicall Alligarchicall Aristocraticall Democraticall nor although the neerest to it Anarchicall it is worse then confusion It can have no proper name unlesse it be called contradiction Thus for the negative part that the two Houses have not the Soveraigne power it now rests to shew in whom it is And for that these two things are considerable first what is the office of the Supreame Governour secondly who hath performed that duty For the first all men grant it is to preserve the people in peace by causing the Laws to be justly distributed and the like which have ever been performed by the King of England for the time being and by none else He hath denounced War proclaimed peace inhaunced and
politick Capacity If the King die during a Parliament ipso facto the Parliament is dissolved Therefore Soveraignty is not virtually in the two Houses By the Kings death untill a late Statute made therein all suites in Law even between party and party were discontinued And at this day the Chancellor the Keeper of the Great Seal the Judges the Sheriffes of Counties Justices of Peace and other Officers by his death are void which could not be if Soveraigne power were not in the naturall person of the King or if that Authority were virtually in the Members The Law of the Land saith that Allegeance is due from the Subject to the King so soon as he is born therefore he is called Subditus natus And so both Soveraignty and Allegeance inherently and by birth-right the one in the person of the King and the other in the person of the Subject And this duty is reciprocall The King ex Officio as King is obliged to protect the people And the Subject in duty is bound to obey their Soveraign for protectio trahit subjectionem subjectio protectionem There be two sorts of Homage viz. Homagium Ligeum homagium feudale The first being Allegeance is due onely to the Kings Person And therefore our Law saith it is inherent inseparable and cannot be respited But the latter being due by reason of the tenure of Land a Writ lies to respite it Besides a body politick can neither doe nor receive Homage It cannot be done but to the naturall person of a man The Lords and Commons 10 Jacobi made this recognition viz. Albeit within few houres after the death of Queen Elizabeth we declared your Majesty our onely and rightfull Leige Lord and Soveraigne Yet as we cannot doe it too often or enough So it cannot be more fit then in this High Court of Parliament where the whole Kingdome in person or by representation is present upon the knees of our hearts to agnize our most constant Faith Obedience and Loyalty to your Majesty your Royall Progeny humbly beseeching it may be as a Memoriall to all Posterity recorded in Parliament and enacted by the same that we recognize and acknowledge that immediately upon the death of Queen Elizabeth the Imperiall Crown of this Realme did by inherent birth-right and lawfull and undoubted succession descend and come to your Majesty And that by Lawfull right and discent under one Imperiall Crowne your Majesty is of England Scotland France and Ireland King And thereunto we most humbly and faithfully submit and oblige our selves our heires and posterities for ever untill the last drop of our bloods be spent And beseech your Majesty to accept the same as the first fruits of our Loyalty to your Majesty and Royall Progeny and Posterity for ever Which if your Majesty will adorne with your Royall Assent without which it neither can be compleat nor remaine to all Posterity we shall adde this to the rest of your Majesties inestimable benefits By this we see that this Kings Father by inherent birth-right had the Soveraigne power of Government That the Lords and Commons in Parliament did not onely submit thereunto but at their humble suite by Act of Parliament obliged themselves their heires and posterities for ever even to the spending of their last drop of blood to preserve Him and His Posterity therein But to insist upon particulars of this nature were too tedious There is no other Language to be found from the beginning of this Parliament up to the Romane conquest Every Statute booke of Law History and the constant practice of the Kingdome herein concurs Neither tongue nor pen untill these Antipodes the Members who belch nothing but contradictions to truth justice and honesty ever made other expressions But the juggle is now even by the vulgar clearly discovered and found to be too slight an Hocus Pocus trick to gaine three Kingdomes But it is visible to the world The Members use the word King as they do the name of God himself either for their owne advantage or to gull the people which amongst infinite other particulars by their various proceedings concerning the Kings Soveraigne power it is manifest First by their foresaid Declaration in words they ascribe unto the King a greater power then he either hath or challengeth He is say they absolutely Supreame head and Governour And this in all things and that finall too for say they from him there is no appeale But even by the same Instrument they tell us that this Soveraignty is not in the Kings person but totally in the Members of the two Houses And after their preaching of this doctrine and exercising the Kings office for some years then they tooke the boldnesse in plaine tearmes to tell us they would have no King that they themselves would without their Soveraigne governe the Kingdome But herein they catched themselves for instantly thereupon the people plainely discerned their intention even from the first they were by this Vote satisfied that the Members aime was not for the publicke but for their owne private to subvert the knowne Law and to reduce the people to the slavery of an everlasting arbitrary and tyrannicall power under their equals The Subjects of England upon this Vote unanimously even through the whole Kingdome as if they were at one instant generally inspired make their Protestation against these usurpers They cry out and call for their leige Lord their King They resolve to submit unto no other government then by our ancient and knowne Laws which the Members perceiving they returned to their owne vomit and thinking to deceive the people with a new sleight do now againe begin to word it for a King and Vote thus That this Nation shall be Governed by King Lords and Commons Which is as perfect a juggle as that whereby they Declared the Kings power to be virtually in themselves If those Votes binde it followeth that we neither have nor can have otherwise then at the Members will either King Law or Government Their last Vote in words seemes in some sort to set up a King But for any thing we know before the next new Moon the Members may fancy to themselves the same motives as formerly and Vote Him quite downe againe So that admitting this power in the Members to set up and pull downe to Vote and uâ—-Vote it is indifferent both to King and people whether to have a Statue and call it King or a King by the Members Vote Then for the Vote it selfe admitting the Members to have authority by their Votes to alter the Law which they have not it is in it selfe most grosse We must say they be governed by King Lords and Commons But what power is hereby intended for the King non constat By the next Vote the Members may declare they meant hereby that the King shall not have any authority in his owne person but still judge the Soveraigne power as formerly
they did to be virtually in themselves And if so it only differs in words from that Vote whereby they resolved to have no King In substance it is one and the same And if the Members mean as the words seeme to import that the power of Government shall be in the King Lords and Commons joyntly and that this Vote be so far binding as to settle that government for ever which is in it selfe inconsistent with that arbitrary power they now even by this very Vote assume it is likewise in it selfe most absurd It is true that we having a knowne Law whereby we are protected in our persons lives and estates to have this Law unalterable otherwise then by the joynt concurrence of the King and two Houses is a constitution beneficiall for the Kingdome but in point of Government it is a Composier not onely improper but destructive to the whole Nation In every Common-wealth accidents frequently happen which of necessity require things to be done yet if not acted with secrecy hazards the ruine of the people For example The King hath intelligence that a forraigne Nation is prepared and resolved to invade this Kingdome Hereupon with great care and secrecy a designe is laid to surprize the enemy In this case for the King at the same time to proclaime his plot not onely frustrates his designe but endangers the destruction of the whole Kingdome Now admit the King Lords and Commons jointly to have the power of Government and it is impossible whatever the designe be although the publishing thereof unavoidably destroy both Nation and people to keep it secret First for the Lords The Members sit and Vote in that House of what capacity or disposition soever by descent and experience shewes that wise men although Lords too sometimes beget fooles Honest men knaves and Loyall men Traytors And for the Commons House he who examines his owne Country be it in any part of the Realme I am confident will find the greater number of those elected Knights and Burgesses unfit for Statesmen or Privy Councellors Nor is it possible that the multitude if they had authority to make such elections which they have not should make choice of apt persons to governe the Kingdome Then adding hereunto the number of those Members amounting unto seven hundred or more and doubtlesse in point of secrecy to proclaime it at the market Crosse and to advise with them is one and the same thing But admit every Member a perfect Statesman the composier of that Body consisting of the King Lords and Commons is such as not onely renders them incapable to governe the Realme but is in it selfe so pernitious to the Common-wealth as that it is impossible for the Divel himselfe to invent unlesse it be that the two Houses without the King a plat-forme more apt to introduce confusion both to Church and State When a Capitall or Criminall offender is convict the knowne Law in point of punishment doth not distinguish of persons The Judge whether the offender be capable of pardon or not must give sentence according to the nature and quality of the offence upon every one alike He hath not power either to pardon or mitigate the punishment That is the office of the Supreame Magistrate Then what a Tyrannicall constitution it were that the King shall not have power to distribute mercy untill the major part of the two Houses have Voted it common experience makes it easie to judge And on the other side if the King without that joynt consent hath not authority to punish offenders It will be very difficult to bring the most horrid malefactors to triall be the offence Treason Murder Sacriledge or any other crime how execrable soever whilst either House doth omit or refuse to Vote it so no punishment An infallible way I confesse it is to embolden themselves and all others their adherents to perpetrate all wickednesse under the Sun If a dispute happen whether to make War or to proclaime Peace to fight or not to fight an enemy and the like it cannot be expected but that those three bodies shall even to the ruine of the Nation irreconcileably differ in opinion But it were endlesse to insist upon particulars of this nature the calamities which have befallen us by the Members arrogating the Soveraigne power of Government and which daily must ensue whilst they either continue that usurpation or shall be suffered in point of Government to share with the King words cannot expresse Suppose three single persons had jointly the Soveraigne power of government no man can imagine but that they would even in matters of greatest weight and perill sterne severall wayes But in point of Government to adde unto the King the Members of the two Houses make it a composier far more preposterous and absurd And consequently to submit to that Vote to be governed by King Lords and Commons although it be admitted the Members intend it a joynt power were no other then to introduce contradictions distractions and confusion Besides by setling the government in King Lords and Commons ipso facto the knowne Law is subverted and an arbitrary power introduced for as before appears they who have the Government and also power to make new and change the old Law cannot be guided but by their owne will Whereas by observing the constitutions of the Realme in submitting to the King alone for matter of Government unto the King and the two Houses joyntlie for making new Laws or altering the old and unto the lawfull Judges of the Realme to expound and declare the Law all arbitrary power is avoided And the King for his assistance in matters of Government hath by the Laws of England three sorts of Councellors viz. His Great Councell His Privy Councell and His Learned Councell The first is properly the Prelates and Peeres of the Realme which besides infinite other testimonies is proved by the Writ of Summons to every Parliament The words are these viz. Rex Vicecomiti c. Quia de advisamento assensu Concilii nostri c. quoddam Parliamentum nostrum apud c. 1. die c. teneri ordinavimus ibidem cum Prelatis Magnatibus Proceribus dicti Regni nostri colloquium habere tract Tibi precipimus c. duos Milites c. venire facias ita quod iidem Milites plenam sufficientem potestatem proâ—se CoÌ„munitate Commitat predict ' c. habeant ad faciendum consentiendum his quae tunc ibidem de communâ— concilio dicti Regni nostri favente Deo contigerint ordinari suantedictis And the Sheriffs returne is thus viz. Virtute istius brevis eligi feci duos Milites viz. A. B. qui plenam sufficientem potestatem c. habent ad faciendum consentiendum iis quae c. de communi concilio Regni Angliae ordinari contigerint Thus it is manifest that it is the Prelates and Peeres who have assistants unto them the Judges and others
of the Kings learned Councell and the Masters of the Chancery whom the King adviseth with as His great Councell It is the office of the Commons as likewise by this Writ appears to do and consent unto such things as the King the Prelates and Peeres agree upon The second are such as the King makes choice of to advise Him in matters of State and are sworne to secrecy And the third are the Judges of the Realme and others of the Long Robe whom the King elects and are sworne to advise Him in matters of Law Now whilst these Councellors keepe within their owne bounds and faithfully performe their severall duties the known Law is preserved and so every one protected But when they extend beyond their bounds confusion ensueth Absurd it were for a sick man concerning his Cure to advise with a Lawyer or for any one in point of Law to take advise of a Physitian So for the Privy Councellors to judge the Law for the Judges to determine matter of State And the like holds with the Members of the two Houses They are neither qualified nor have Commission either to intermeddle with the Law or the affaires of State otherwise then the King shall thinke fit to intrust them by asking them their advise wherein they are onely to deliver their opinions not to controle Therefore when the two Houses have passed a Bill for a new Law and have presented it to the King they have performed their duty it then rests in the King whether to make it a Law or not wherein it may be necessary for Him to take the advise of His Privy Councell His learned Councell or of both And I conceive that may be the reason why Kings have used to answer Bils which they passe not by these words le Roy le veili By these words of the Writ viz. Quia de advisamento assensu consilii nostri c. quoddam Parliamentum nostrum c. teneri ordinavimus c. It appears that the King depends upon His Councell in calling Parliaments which oftentimes is occasioned upon State-affaires such as requires the assembling of a Parliament yet not safe to reveale those reasons to the Parliament men And so the King by advise of His Privy Councell or His learned Councell may and oftentimes doth reject Bils presented unto Him by both Houses and yet not convenient to render His reasons to that multitude Therefore clear it is the men at Westminster have extended beyond their Commission and so all these Votes are absolutely invalid not binding either King or people The King notwithstanding these Votes is or whatever the Members shall or can Vote will and must be our only Supreame Governour And consequently these men at Westminster by breaking their bounds are themselves guilty of those things which in and by their declarations to the people they grossely and falsely aspersed their King with They have and do arrogate to use their owne words an arbitrary power without above against all the Courts of Justice the Parliament it selfe not excepted And thereby the knowne Law is subverted and consequently they are most palpably guilty of that crime for which they themselves condemned as a Traytor the late Earle of Strafford but for attempting to do and that upon a slender proof too Upon the whole matter it may with as much justice sense be said that there was yet never one King of England as to question whether the King for time being hath inherently in His person the Soveraigne power of Government But that man who hath taken consideration hereof and yet so absurdly peevish as to remaine unsatisfied of the Kings right herein the whole world must judge Him worse then out of his wits to give it unto the Members Suppose the Steward of a Lord or Commoner to claime property in the estate of his Master I presume the Houses would account him an unjust Judge who should determine the case on the Stewards behalfe upon his owne testimony So here the Members challenge not onely the Soveraignty due unto their Leige Lord and King but an authority arbitrary over King and people wherein they have not the least colour of proof more then their owne affirmation Besides when a witnesse although not a party contradicts himselfe his testimony becomes invalid But the Members solemnly upon their Oathes even this Parliament have declared the King their only Supreame Governour wherein they swore not for themselves but on anothers behalfe that is for the Kings Interest So that every prudent man in common sense and reason ought to beleeve that which these men have thus sworne for the King And absolutely to reject this their affirmation contrary to that Oath and for their owne advantage And so I conclude this point concurring with the Lords and Commons 1 Jacobi that the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme is by inherent birth-right descended and come to this our King Charls And that according to the Oathes of these Members and their predecessors in former Parliaments he is our onely Supreame Governour In the next place it is shewed that the Militia of the Kingdom is in the King CHAP. VIII That the Militia of the Kingdome by the knowne Laws of the Realme is inherent in the Crowne And at the absolute command of the King and none else IT appears before that the King is the onely Supreame Governour which of it selfe is sufficient to satisfie any man of judgement that the Militia of the Kingdome is likewise in Him yet Mr. Pryn by licence of the Commons House hath published a Treatise Intituled thus The Parliaments Interest in the Militia Whereby he endeavours to prove that the Members of the two Houses which he miscals the Parliament have the power over the Militia the Forts the Navie and Revenues of the Crown And begins thus It must saith he be granted that the power which His Majesty hath or His Predecessors enjoyed ever the Militia the Forts the Navie Ammunition and Revenues of the Crowne was originally granted to His Ancestors by the Parliament and Kingdomes free consent Answer The Militia the Forts the Navy Ammunition and Revenues of the Crowne saith M. Pryn were granted to the Kings Ancestors by the Parliament and Kingdomes free consent So that neither the Parliament nor the Kingdome by his owne confession made the grant nor who he meanes was this grantor himself cannot imagine However it is not worth the labour to make further inquiry thereof for most certaine it is never any such grant was made But admit that before the Kings Ancestors enjoyed them some persons had power and Interest therein and made a grant thereof to the Kings Ancestors It is as hard a taske thereby to prove that the Members have title to these things as to find out this imagined grantor who never yet was in esse The Argument is but thus The Militia the Forts the Navy Ammunition and Revenues of the Crowne were originally granted to the Kings Ancestors Ergo at
this day by the Laws of England the Members of the two Houses have right thereunto which is most absurd But Mr. Pryn affirming that these things were granted to the Kings Ancestors and the truth being that the King and His Ancestors time out of minde have enjoyed them It is a good argument to prove the King hath title to them And for Parliaments as before appeares The first Act we have is Magna Charta made 9 H. 3. but the Kings Auncestors and predecessors enjoyed the Militia the Forts the Navy Ammunition and Revenues of the Crowne many hundred of yeares before that time therefore could not be granted by the Parliament or by its consent And for the Kingdomes consent Master Pryn must explaine his meaning what he intends thereby before it be Intelligible Then saith M. Pryn the King hath no power to array arme or muster His Subjects but in such manner as the Parliament by speciall Acts hath prescribed Answer This being granted makes directly against Master Pryn it disproves the Members pretended power to the Militia and makes good the Kings interest therein The Argument is thus The King cannot muster His Subjects but in such sort as is prescribed by Act of Parliament To conclude thereupon that the Members of the two Houses have the power of the Militia nothing can be more absurd But it directly implies that none but the King can muster the people And consequently the Militia is in the King And for Acts of Parliament prescribing how or in what manner the people shall be mustered or arrayed we have none of that nature untill the Raign of King Ed. 1. But the Militia of the Kingdome was executed and commanded by the Kings of England 1200. yeares before that time And by every Act of Parliament which doth in any sort order or appoint the mustering or arraying of the Subject It appeares that the Power and Authority it self before that Law was in the King And by none of them is taken out of him And so this Argument of Master Pryns is to no purpose But saith M. Pryn The King hath these things and the Revenues of His Crown in His politick Capacity as saith he a Major and Commonalty a Dean and Chapter and the like are seized of their Lands And therefore saith he the King neither by His Will nor by His Letters Patents can devise alien or sell the same Answer If it be admitted that the King cannot alien such Lands and Revenues as He is seized of in His politick Capacity which is in it selfe most absurd how this disproves his title to the Militia the Forts the Navie Ammunition and Revenues of the Crowne is not intelligible The Argument in effect is but thus The King hath the Militia c. in his politick capacity Ergo he hath it not Or thus The King cannot sell the Revenues of his Crowne Ergo the Members have the Interest therein and may seize them But saith Master Pryn the Ships Armes and Ammunition seized of by the Members were bought with the Kingdomes Money And therefore the Members may seize them Answer Suppose it understood what is the Kingdomes Money and that with such Money Ships Armes and Ammunition are bought It seemes a good Argument for the King to Seize them For He as King ex Officio is obliged to preserve His people in Peace Besides that money or other things which no particular Subject can challenge property in by the Lawes of the Kingdome is the Kings But by the Lawes of England we have no person or pollitick body by the name of the Kingdome which is capable to have property either in Lands or Goods And for the Members of the two Houses as Parliament men they have not any politick Capacity they are not a body to sue or to be sued nor are capable to buy or sell nor have property in any estate And consequently Master Pryn by his own Argument hath as much title to seize the foresaid Ships Armes and Aummunition as they Then saith M. Pryn the Members seized the Ships and Revenues of the Crown to prevent the arrivall of forraign forces and a Civill Warre which they foresaw As saith he Queene Elizabeth in time of War with Spaine granting letters of Mart to seize all materialls for Warre transported through the narrow Seas Answer By this discourse we are told what moved the Members to seize the Kings Navy and the Revenues of his Crown which in effect is thus viz. The Members having usurped an Arbitrary power over King and people and thereby having destroyed the Monarchy of England had just cause not only to expect opposition from their own Soveraign but in his relief arrivall of forraigne forces from all the Kings in Christendome For upon the same grounds as the Members made this seizure the Subjects of any King may doe the like It is as easie for the people of Spaine France or any other Nation in the world to say they foresee a War as these Members pretend it And I am certaine it is as unlawfull and directly against the constitutions of England for the Subjects here to assume this power as for the people of any other Country to doe the like to their King Therefore I grant it was an act of Pollicy for the Members to seize the Kings Ships and the Revenues of His Crown It was a great and principle means to prevent the suppression of this their Rebellion But all that proves the legality of their proceedings no more then a high-way man having taken a purse murders the party robbed to prevent his own discovery makes the robbery lawfull And so M. Pryns Argument in effect is but thus The Members de facto have seized the Kings Ships and Revenues of his Crown ergo they have done it lawfully Thus in Answer to Master Pryns Arguments whereby he endeavours to prove that the Members have power over the Militia c. But that they have no colour to claime any Authority therein further appeares thus First all men must grant That so long as the people have been governed by a Law so long the power of the Militia must have been in some But the people of England as before appears have been governed by a Monarchicall power above 1200 yeares before the institution of the two Houses And all that while the Kings of England for the time being and none else have executed that Authority Therefore not in the Members Secondly it is absolutely necessary that the power of the Militâ—â— be in such hands as may at all times provide against approaching dangers to the Common-wealth But that cannot be the Members they are not in esse out of Parliament Suppose this Nation in the vacancy of a Parliament be suddenly invaded by a Forraigne enemy or infested by a domestick insurrection If none have power to command the people to assemble and make resistance untill the summoning of the two Houses of Parliament nothing but distraction to King and people
first confessing the foresaid facts of Levying Warre doth deny an intent to harme the King in His Crowne or Dignity Then for rescuing the King from His Cavaleers If M. Pryn reflect upon the case of Robert Earl of Essex in the time of Queen Elizabeth he will finde That that Earl in comparison of Edg-hill Battaile gathered together but a handfull of men nor was that Queen fought with nor her Person in danger All which things the foresaide Earl at his Arraignment alledged for himself And protested his intent was onely to remove from the Queen some evill Councellors about her yet not available The fact by him confessed viz. without warrant from the Queen in a tumultuous manner to raise force was Judged Treason for which that Earl and his Adherents were executed as Traitors Thus for the point of Levying Warre against the King Then for imagining the death of the King Queen and Prince In this case the intent of the party acting is considerable For example suppose the King to be distracted or distempered endeavours to violate himself or assaults a Subject To lay hands upon the King to preserve His or the Subjects life in those cases and such like the facts are lawfull And it may so happen that the King may be slaine and yet no Treason As in case of tilting and such like Now the intent of any man cannot appeare otherwise then by the parties confession or by Proofes Circumstances and Presumptions Then for the Authors and Actors in this War It is true they deny an intention to kill the King the Queen or Prince But the Circumstances are as full and pregnant to prove they intended it as is possible A man seeme to come out of a house with a naked sword bloody none being in the house but the Corps of a dead body newly slaine with a Sword This is so pregnant a presumption as that before a just Judge and an equall Jury the mans deniall will not availe him Suppose one should assault and strike the King the Queen or Prince and with violence pursue the same and for this be indicted to have imagined their death for that man to alleadge he intended not to kill him or them so assaulted were in vaine But certainly the presumptions to prove the Authors and Actors of this War intended to kill the King the Queen and Prince are far more pregnant Suppose the Members and their Souldiers had declared their intent to be to kill them no man can devise how they could have endeavoured to have effected it more then hath been done by this Warre Severall Battailes have been joyned the King and Prince in person And many thousands on the Kings party slaine And for the Queen witnesse the businesse at Burlington The Authors and Actors of the powder-plot were justly condemned for Treason Upon that point of imagining to kill the King the Queen and and Prince But upon this ground of M. Pryns they might have escaped punishment It had been as easie for them to have alledged that they intended not to kill the King the Queene and Prince As for the Actors in this Warre to pretend it But Master Pryn undertakes to make this War against the King to be Lawfull by Authority and presidents Julius Caesar saith he by a Conspiracy of the Senate of Rome was murdered having 23 wounds given him And then shewes the Rebellions in the Raigne of King John Henry 3. Edward 2. Richard 2. and other Kings And some of them it is true were murdred by their Subjects Answer I confesse if presidents and examples of this kinde be Authorities to prove the facts lawfull It is easie enough to justifie this and every Rebellion And M. Pryn having cited that president of Julius Caesar and himself acknowledging that fact to be murder he was overseen to omit citing that of Judas for it was somewhat later in time it excels that fact against Caesar and is very sutable with this of the Members He betrayed his Master and the Saviour of the world with a Kisse these their Soveraigne with an Oath And like unto those Treasons and Murders against Caesar King Edw. 2. and King Rich. 2. they might very aptly have cited the examples of some of their deare brethren the Scots severall King have been Rebelled against and Murdred too by the Subjects of that Nation Yet we see they are not by the people of Scotland made examples or cited for Authorities to prove the lawfulnesse thereof But contrarywise That Nation doth unanimously declare it their duty to relieve and rescue their King from out of the hands of His Rebellious English Subjects And many other examples I confesse there be in forraigne Countries both Christians Turks and Infidells where Kings by their own Subjects have been betrayed and murdered And so the discontented people in any Nation may alledge that King Edw. 2. Rich. 2. of England being lawfull Kings were by their owne Subjects Rebelled against and Murdered And so be the scene in Spaine France or any other Kingdome conclude it is lawfull for them to doe the like Then M. Pryn explaines the meaning of the aforesaid Statute of 25 Edw. 3. by which it is declared to be Treason to Levy Warre against the King to compasse or imagine the death of the King the Queen or Prince But the words of the foresaid Act saith he must be understood with this Limitation viz. so long as Kings execute their Just Royall powers according to the Laws of God and of their Realmes that saith he is the meaning of the holy Ghost And even so saith he are these words of Saint Paul viz. let every Soul be subject to the higher powers to be understood with that limitation yet saith he No private man of his owne authority ought to rise in Armes against them without the generall consent of the whole Kingdome or both Houses of Parliament Answer This was a doctrine aptly divulged for the justification of this Rebellion And a ready way I confesse to draw the multitude to their party who oftentimes are as in this case they were misled upon pretence of Law and Religion to their owne ruine Now admit the Members to have got the Soveraigne power If Mr. Pryn be asked this question How he will have the holy Ghost now to speake If the Members make a Law and declare it Treason for the people to leavy War against them whether that Law shall be understood with the same limitation Mr. Pryns answer will be that the limitation is now ended The Members he will say must expound the meaning of their owne Law and S. Pauls words too For the Members themselves tell the people that they are the Kingdome whatever they do they would have us beleeve to be the act of every person in the whole Nation And so not examinable but by God himselfe in the next world so that the Members having got the power into their owne hands whether they governe by the Laws of God
And although this rule be exactly observed yet once having declared himself he is every houre in danger of destruction For when a new faction gets up which is very frequent changing his note oftentimes preserves him not from an impeachment he is from thence but dandled as a whelp under a Lyons Paw when that party thinkes fit cru hed in pieces Now should some of the Judges of any Court of Justice in Westminster-Hall demean themselves in this manner with their fellow Judges no wise man would esteeme them to have the power of Judicature And why a part of the Members of either House should have this Priviledge more then they is beyond the reach of the Westminster-men to make it good By this it appears that the Members have not freedome of Speech and consequently no House of Parliament Fourthly admitting the Members had not been injuriously expulsed And had they been permitted freely to give their opinions yet these men at Westminster have disabled themselves to sit or Vote there which is proved thus Every Traytor Murderer and Felon by the Law of the Land is disabled to sit or vote in Parliament But these persons are Traytors Murderers and Felons Ergo. The Major needs no proof every one grants it And for the Minor Those men have not onely committed such facts as the Law judgeth Treason Murder and Felony but even making it their daily work are still constant to those their principles They as before appears actually Levyed War against their King which is Treason They have actually endeavoured to kill the King the Queen and Prince which is Treason They have counterfeited the Kings Great Seal which is Treason They have counterfeited His Mony which is Treason They have not onely denyed their King to be the Supreame Governour but have arrogated the power of Soveraignty to themselves which is Treason They have this Parliament declared it Treason to attempt to change the Law But themselves have actually subverted both Law and Religion And have reduced both King and people to their Arbitrary power which is Treason They have and still doe imprison the Person of their King which is Treason Then for Murder besides their owne consciences if they have any remorse inwardly gnawing the fatherlesse children and widdowes of those slaine on both sides in this unnaturall War raised and prosecuted by them against King and Kingdome in swarmes to testifie against them But this not all they doe still in colder bloud and in further abuse of Justice by pretext and colour of Law sometimes in their own names other while imitating the ordinary formes of Law by the mouths of their nominall mock Judges whose understandings and consciences by their foresaid Order and with bribes and rewards they have in vassalage condemne murder and put to death the Kings Loyall Subjects as Traytors and this principally for refusing to commit Treason And for felony That offence is included both in the crime of Treason and Murder but there needs not that help to prove them guilty thereof By the Law of England it is felony of death to steal goods exceeding the value of twelve pence But these persons in the nature of robbery have by force taken from King and People their whole livelihood Suppose 20 Troopers to make an Order that all persons passing through High-gate shall deliver unto them all such Money as shall be found about them If the Troopers by colour of this Order force the passengers to deliver their Money It were ridiculous to deny this to be robbery Yet if that Order made by the Troopers were binding the fact were lawfull So here those men at Westminster have ordered which they stile an Ordinance of Parliament that all the people of England shall give unto them the 5 part and the 20 part of their Estates That every man who eats or drinkes buyes or sels shall pay unto them a certaine summe by the name of Excise That every County and Towne shall likewise contribute unto them and their Souldiers vast summes of money That all the Kings Revenues shall be disposed of to them and to their use That all persons who shall oppose them herein shall be judged Traytors and forfeit unto these men their whole estates and fortunes And by colour of those Orders we see they do by force seize and take all to their owne use Now in regard the foresaid persons at Westminster have not power as before is proved to make such Laws it directly followeth that the forcing the King and people herein is unlawfull and consequently both King and Subject are robbed of their money and goods And their estates wrongfully detained from them But peradventure these incendiaries at Westminster will object that although they be guilty of those crimes yet untill they be judicially convict thereof it cannot be alleadged against them Answer First By their owne practice they have judged this point against themselves For as before appears without any legall conviction they have expulsed almost all their fellow-Members And that for supposed facts which if guilty of disabled not them to sit or vote in the house So that these Westminster-men having to the view of the world committed such facts as by law disables them to sit or vote to be judged no Members themselves must confesse is at the most but lex Talionis Secondly it may appear even in the judgment of Law that a man is guilty of treason murder or felony although not attainted or convicted thereof For example one calls another before any conviction of such a crime Traytor Murderer or Thief The Person thus charged brings his action of slaunder In this case if the Defendant justifie his words alleaging that the Plaintif committed such a fact which the law judgeth Treason Felony or Murder and at the triall proved it The Jury ought to acquit the Defendant of the slaunder yet still that Traytor Murderer or Felon is not convict of the fact Therefore clear it is a Traytor is a Traytor And the people may as well know him so to be and as lawfully so call him before attainder or conviction as to know a spade to be a spade and so call it Besides when a treason murder or felony is committed it is the proper office of every petty Constable and of every Justice of peace nay it is the duty of every honest Subject to apprehend the malefactor and to bring him to due punishment wherein neither priviledge of Parliament dignity of the Person or imployment of the Offender is any protection It is not only lawful but the duty of every honest English man to lay hands upon the Speakers of both Houses or upon any Peer or Parliament-man or any other having committed the crime of treason murder or felony or justly suspected for the same And consequently they ought to apprehend the aforesaid Westminster-men It is true that in the ordinary proceedings no man can be convict of treason murder or felony but by Act of Parliament or
by judiciall proceedings recorded in his life time yet there is another rule in Law too viz. that no man shall take advantage of his owne wrong Therefore if one before he be convict by such proceedings be killed in rebellion and his corps viewed by the chief Justice he forfeits both lands and goods Now suppose 500 ordinary persons not claiming the power or name of a Parliament to have committed the crime of treason murder or felony Then assemble to themselves multitudes out the Judges from their Justice seat place those of their faction therein seize the Kings Great Seale break it in pieces and counterfeit an other Imprison the King and thus stop the course of Justice against themselves Grosse it were in that case because unattainted or unconvicted not to declare them Traytors Should the people in that case omit by all possible endeavours to apprehend and bring them to punishment wherein the Law upon resistance doth warrant the killing of them they were not only disobeyers of the Law but the cause of their owne misery Even so it is with the people at this day There is no difference to be found betwixt those 500 men and them at Westminster but the Westminster-mens pretence of authority which renders them more odious And therefore the people ought to be more zealous to apprehend them Fiftly it is an undoubted truth that whilst the Members are so over-awed as to act and doe what others command them It is no free Parliament and consequently all their proceedings void and null But those Westminster-men are in that manner awed Even as they by tumults expelled their fellow Members and by their tyranny fettered their consciences themselves are now by the power of an Army forced to captivate their owne sence to the will of a few inconsiderable persons some particular Officers of the Army The Members do not they dare not act any thing but in obedience of the results of a Councell of Warre Nay more we see not to alter and change opinion how contradictory soever to former votes how pernicious to King Church or Common-wealth as they receive commands from thence is ground sufficient both of an expulsion from the House and an impeachment of Treason Hence it is That we find such contradictory results sometimes these persons voting themselves a Parliament sometimes no Parliament sometimes much shew of setling a Forme of Religion they unvote that againe and declare upon pretence of satisfying tender Consciences to have none at all They do in effect say and unsay vote one and the same thing lawfull and not law even as the Cudgell hangs over them And so unlesse persons whose Soules and Consciences are so far in vassalage as to say act and doe what ever the present prevailing Party commands make the Houses of Parliament these Westminster men are not they and consequently if nothing but this were against them it proves them no Members of Parliament Sixtly admitting these men not disabled by any or all the foresaid means yet by their late Votes declaring their resolution not to make any addresse or application to the King nor to permit any from him they have by the Law of England dissolved themselves For setting aside the Kings Writs of summons the peoples electing the Knights Citizens and Burgesses and the returns thereof made And the Persons assembled have no more authority to sit or vote in either House then any other men And by those Writs they have nothing else to doe but to treat with the King concerning the affaires of the Realme Therefore by waving that they quit all their imployment They doe by it clearly publish unto the world an absolute deniall to take upon them those things which the King and people intrusted them with and for which they had Commission And consequently what ever they doe is without Commission or Authority But to doe them right they are in these votes more ingenuous then formerly There is now a harmony between their words and actions which heretofore jarred For notwithstanding their often Declarations and high Protestations even with deep execrations upon themselves if not performed to make the King glorious and the people to flourish The world might even from the first beginning of the Parliament see that all their actions tended to the destruction both of King and Kingdome Now suppose a new gang of four Judges set up in the Court of Kings bench by colour of Authority of these Persons at Westminster and three of them by an Order of their own to expell the fourth then two of the three to expel the third then one of the two to assemble multitudes and expell the other And after this the last man by himself alone or calling unto him two or three other persons sutable to himself to judge the Law and thereby to declare the wealth of the Nation to be their owne and both the Members and the rest of the people to be their slaves And having got an Army on foot to support their actions Then to declare that they will have no more relation unto or medling with the Members such Persons would quickly be denounced no Judges of that Court Declared to act without commission or authority To be Subverters of the Law and would be impeached of high Treason against this new State Even so ought all the people to declare these Westminster-men It is their case against the King the people and the old known fundamentall Laws of England Upon the whole matter I cannot more aptly parallel these persons then unto those men our Saviour in the Gospel warns us of They have got within the walls of the Houses of Parliament but entred not in by the dore They came in Sheeps clothing expressing themselves most zealous to advance Religion and to preserve the peoples Liberty But by their fruits we find them inwardly ravening Wolves they are like unto those who our Saviour calls thieves that come to steale kill and destroy they have abolished all Religion they have taken from the people their Liberty and almost to the last drop of bloud have sucked from them their livelihood In a word since they cast off their loyalty and so making themselves masterlesse those Wolves are so filled with pride as that they disdaine all other Creatures They are so gorged with malice as that they snarle and pinch at most men they meet which hath its effects like unto the biting of a mad Dog scarce curable but by a medicine prepared with the heart or liver of that biting Cur. So the world sees when these Westminster men have once fixed their malice whether upon those against them or upon their owne Party whether he have deserved well or ill whether the fact charged upon him be lawfull or unlawfull it is a million to one in fine he perisheth Nor can the wit of man find a cure for this grief but to unkennell these Wolves And to effect it the people of England by the rule of reason
by the law of nature of Nations by the Laws of the Realme and by the Laws of God are obliged to doe their uttermost endeavour For to their dores it is now brought wherein they cannot expect any formall Warrants according to the ordinary proceedings For as before appears the Malefactors themselves have stopped the passage of the Law the people therefore ought not onely to declare these Westminster men no Houses of Parliament and no Members of them but they are obliged to reject all their Orders Ordinances and Commands what name or title soever they have given or shall give them And also to apprehend their persons and bring them to due punishment of Law CHAP. XII Results upon the premises That the people of England under the government of the KING according to the known Laws of the Realme are a free Subject THe use of a Law is to protect every one under it in his just Rights which I grant cannot be done unlesse by that Law the lives and estates of the people be subject to the judgement of some known persons without that neither Malefactor can be punished nor Controversie decided Hence it followeth that the happinesse or misery of the people depends upon the good or the bad constitution of that law under which they are governed For such a law may be as that the people are thereby little altered from that condition they were in when they had no Law at all For example where there is no Law and so the strongest party hath the best interest every one is a Tyrant each to other and where the supream Magistrate hath an arbitrary power the people are no better then legall slaves to that supreame Governour Now this Arbitrary power cannot be avoided but by observing these principles viz. By placing the Soveraigne power of Government in one hand and the absolute determination of that Law by which under the Supreame Magistrate the people are governed in an other hand And for making new Lawes or altering the old That neither the supreame Governour by himself alone nor any other without him have that authority But that such a composed body be therewith trusted as have not the power of government All which is observed by the Laws of England The King by our law is the onely supream Governour but his power is not unlimited for the people under Him are governed by a knowne Law And this Law not declared by the King but by the Judges of the Realme being persons unconcerned and sworne to decide controversies according to the Law To the King is due forfeitures for Treason fines imposed upon offenders transgressing the Law and the like But the King doth neither Judge what is Treason what fact doth breake the Law nor hath power to impose a fine upon any offender And for making Laws the King alone hath not that power nor is it in any other without him It is no Law without the joynt consent of the King and the Members of the two Houses which united Body hath not the government of the people And so every one is limited and kept within his owne bounds But although we have a knowne Law and for the most part in the execution thereof knowne processe which and no other the people are obliged to obey yet sometimes for necessity the Law refers severall things to be acted and done according to the discretion of persons trusted whose Commands although they doe not observe the ordinary rules and knowne processe of the Law the people are bound to submit unto For example It is the office of every Sheriff of his County to preserve the Kings peace within his liberty Therefore upon any suddaine insurrection tumult or other just occasion the Law to enable him to performe that duty gives him authority to raise the power of that County wherein it is best to the discretion of the Sheriff to judge when it is necessary to command the peoples assistance But herein he is not the finall Judge In that case it is at the equall perill of the Sheriff and the inhabitants of the County To the one when to command and to the other when to obey If the Sheriff without just cause force the people to rise himsefe is punishable And if he requires the inhabitants to assist him when it is necessary and they refuse the people are punishable In which case both Sheriffs and Inhabitants being equally concerned therefore neither the one nor the other is Judge to determine whether there was cause to require assistance or not That question the cause being regularly brought before them properly belongs to the Judges of the Law And therein he who findes himselfe agreived hath liberty to commence his action and bring it to tryall And as in that case of the Sheriff for his particular County the like accidents may happen whereby the whole Kingdome may be in such danger as not possible by the ordinary meanes and knowne practise of Law to prevent the destruction of it The Nation may be so suddenly invaded by a forraigne enemy or infested by a domestick insurrection as that without present supplies and assistance of men money and other provisions of War the whole people and Kingdome may perish It were grosse in such a case to be tyed unto the formalities of Law or to want meanes to prevent that danger And this cannot be supplied unlesse some have legall power to command and the people obliged to obey Therefore by our Law the King ex officio as King hath that power He may in such cases by His regall authority compell His subjects in His and His peoples defence to serve in person and contribute with their purses Yet herein the King is not the finall Judge if so the estate and fortune of the subject were at His will He might then upon pretence of necessity draw from the people their whole fortunes and estates which were in effect a power arbitrary Therefore as before in the case of the Sheriff so here as the people are at their extreame perill in case of danger bound to obey the Kings commands So it is at the perill of the Kings Ministers therein imployed that the King hath just cause to make that command For every subject who by the Kings commands or warrants is molested either in person or estate may prosecute suit in a Court of Justice against the Kings officers who interrupted him wherein the Kings Warrants Writs or Commands are no legall justification unlesse it judicially appear to the Judges of that Court where the suite depends that the King had just cause to require that assistance For the King is not the finall Judge in such a case So that our Law in the first place preserves the Kingdome and people from danger by providing remedy against those sudden accidents yet protects the subject from tyranny and arbitrary power And this rule for the liberty of the subject holds in all cases that is to say The Subject of England under the