Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	die_v	life_n	tail_n	2,052	5	9.7416	5	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56189	A plea for the Lords, and House of Peers, or, A full, necessary, seasonable enlarged vindication of the just, antient hereditary right of the earls, lords, peers, and barons of this realm to sit, vote, judge, in all the parliaments of England wherein their right of session, and sole power of judicature without the Commons as peers ... / by William Prynne.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1659 (1659)	Wing P4035; ESTC R33925	413,000	574

spiritual Courâ— for a temporal cause belonging to the Crown and Common Law which was adjudged by the Lords upon examination to be untrue To passe by the accusation of Sir Philip Courtney of divers hainous matters oppressions dissensions before the King and Lords in the Parliament of 16 R. 2. n. 6.13 14. of which more anon In the Parliament of 17 R. 2. n. 20 21. John Duke of Lancastre Steward and Thomas Duke of Gloucester Constable of England complained to the King that Sir Thomas Talbot Knight with other his adherents conspired the deaths of the said Dukes in divers parts of Cheshire as the same was confessed and well known and prayed That the Parliament might judge of the fault Whereupon the King and the Lords in Parliament without the Commons adjudged the said fact to be open and High Treason And thereupon they awarded two Writs to the Sherifs of Yorks and of Derby to take the body of the said Sir Thomas retornable in the Kings Bench in the month of Easter next ensuing And open Proclamation was made in Westminster Hall That upon the Sherifs retorn and at the next coming in of the said Sir Thomas he should be convicted of Treason and incurr the loss and pain of the same and that all such who should receive him after the Proclamation should receive the like losse and pain In the Parliament of 20 R. 2. n. 15 16 23. Sir Thomas Haxey Clark was by the King Lords in Parl. adjudged to die as a Traytor and to forfeit all his Lands Goods Chattels Offices and Livings for exhibiting to the House of Commons a scandalous Bill against the King and his Court for moderating the outragious expences of his Court by Bishops and Ladies c. Upon the Bishops intercession the King spared his life and delivered him into the custody of the Archbishop to remain as his Prisoner In the Parliament of 21 R. 2. n. 19 20. Pl. Parl. n. 2. to 15. The Lords Appellants appealed Sir Tho Mortimer Knight of High Treason for raising war against the King accroaching royal power and purposing to surrender his homage and allegiance and depose the King Who flying into the parts of Ireland thereupon the Lords in Parliament assigned him a certain day to come and render himself to the Law or else to be adjudged and proceeded against as a Traytor and Proclamation thereof was made accordingly in England and Ireland to render himself within 3 months And that after that time all his Abettors and Aiders should be reputed for and forfeit as Traytors He not coming at the day The Duke of Lancaster Steward of England by assent of the Lords in Parliament adjudged him a Traytor and that he should forfeit all his Lands in fee and see tayl together with all his Goods and Chattels The like Judgement in like manner was in the same Parliament given against Sir John Cobham Knight for the like Treason Placit Coronaen 16. On the 22 day of March 22 R. 2. n. 27. The King by assent of the Lords adjudged Sir Robert Plesington Knight then dead a Traytor for levying war against him with the Duke of Glocester at Harrengary for which he should lose all his Lands in fee or fee tayl and all his goods And n. 28. Henry Bowht Clerk for being of Counsel with the Duke of Hereford in his device was adjudged by the King and Lords to die and forfeit as a Traytor after which his life was pardoned and he banished In the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 79. As the Commons acknowledged that the Iudgements in Parliament had always of right belonged to the King and Lords and not unto the Commons So therein the King and Lords alone without the Commons gave Judgement in sundry cases as Judges in Parliament 1. In Sir Thomas Haxey his case who in his own name presented a Petition in this Parliament a nostre tresedoute seigniour le ROY a LES SEIGNIORS DU PARLIAMENT shewing that in the last Parliament of 21 R. 2. that he delivered a Bill to the Commons of the said Parliament for the honour and profit of the said King and of all the Realm for which Bill at the will of the King he was by the King and Lords adjudged a Traytor and to forfeit all that he had praying that the record of the said Judgement with the dependants thereupon might be vacated and nulled by them in this present Parliament as erronious and that he might be restored to all his degrees farms estate goods chattels ferms pensions lands tenements rents offices advow sons and possessions whatsoever and their appurt and enjoy them to him and his heirs notwithstanding the said Iudgement or any grant made of them by the King The Commons House exhibited a Petition likewise on his behalf to the like effect adding that this judgement given against him for delivering this Bill to the Commons in Parliament was eneontre droit et la course quel avoit estre use devant in Parlement en anientesment des Customs deâ— leâ— Communes Upon which Petitions Nostre Seignior le ROY de Induis assent des touz les Seigniors esperituelz et temporelz ad ordinez et adjudges que le dit juggement renus vers le dit Thomas in Parlement soit de tout casses revorses repellez et adnullez et tenus pur nul force n'effect et que le dit Thomas soit restitut a ses nom et fame c. nient obstant mesme le juggement 2ly In the case of Judge Rickhill 1 HÂ· 4. n. 92. On the 18 of November the Commons prayed the King that Sir William Rickhill late Just of the Common Bench arrested for a Confession he had taken of the Duke of Gloucester at Calice might be brought to answer for it devant les Seigniors du Parlement whereupon he was brought into Parliament before the Kings presence and all the Lords spiritual and temporal and Commons assembled in Parliament where Sir Walter Clapton Chief Justice of the Kings Bench by the kings command examined the said Sir William how and by what warrant he went to Calice to the said Duke of Glocester and upon what message Who answered that king Richard sent him a special Writ into Kent there recited verbatim commanding him by the faith and allegiance whereby he was obliged to him and under pain of forfeiting all he had to goe unto Caleys And that at Dover he received a Commission from the said king by the hand of the Earl Marshal to confer with the Duke of Glocester and to hear whatsoever he would say or declare unto him and to certifie the king thereof in proper person wherever he should be fully and distinctly under his Seal Whereupon he went thither and took the said Dukes Examination in writing according to the purport of the said Commission a Copy whereof the Duke himself received c Upon the hearing of his answer and defence

were first made never sate in Parliament Whereas this writ hath no operation or effect to enoble him or his posterity unless and until he actually sit in Parliament for if he die before he sit or sit not at all neither he nor his issue are Noble This distinction and concession of his contradicts his former opinion That the Writ it self doth not ennoble the person and his heirs for if it did then he and they should be ennobled by it though he died before he â—aâ—e in Parliament because they are thus ennobled by Letters Patents which create them Nobles or Peers and make them actually such though they never sit in Parliament 7ly Sir Edward Cook in his 4 Institutes p. 44 45. thus resolves If the King by his Writ calleth any Knight or Esquire to be a Lord of the Parliament he cannot refuse to serve the King there in communi illo confilio for the good of his Country But if the King had called an Abbot Peer or other regular Prelate by Writ to the Parliament to the Common Council of the Realm if he held not of the King per Baroniam he might refuse to sit in Parliament because quoad secularia he was mortuus in lege and therefore not capable to have a voice or place in Parliament unless he did hold per Baroniam and were to that Common Council called by Writ which made him capable And though such a Prelate regular had been often called by Writ and had de facto had place and voice in Parliament yet if in rei veritate he hold not per Baroniam HE OUGHT TO BE DISCHARGED OF THAT SERVICE AND TO SIT NO MORE For that the Abby of Leicester was founded by Robert Fitz Robert Earl of Leicester albeit the Patronage came to the Crown by the forfeiture of Simon de Mountford Earl of Leicester yet being of a Subjects foundation it could not be holden per Baroniam therefore the Abbot had no capacity to be called to the Parliament and thereupon the King did grant Quod idem Abbas successores sui de veniendo ad Parliamentum Concilia nostra vel haeredum nostrorum quieâ—i sint exonerati in perpetuum But all these Cases abovesaid and others that might be remembred touching this point as little Rivers do flow from the fountain of Modus tenendi Parliamentum where it is said Ad Parliamentum summoneri venire debent ratione tenurae suae omnes singuli Archiepiscopi Episcopi Abbates Barones Priores alii Majores Cleri qui tenent PER COMITATUM VEL BARONIAM ratione hujusmodi tenurae nulli minores nisi eorum praesentia necessaria utilis reputetur To which purpose he likewise cites the Act of Parliament of 10 H. 2. called the Assize of Clarindon and the Great Charter of King John in the 17 year of his reign here forecited p. 21 30 31. For Modus tenendi Parliamentum here so much magnified I have already p. 20 sufficiently discovered it to be a late forgery and imposture out of the very Treatise it self by undeniable proofs which I wonder Sir Ed. Cook Mr. Agar and other pretended judicious Antiquaries observed nor being so obvious yet though it be an imposture and erronious in other things I shall grant it true in this particular here cited As to the point in controversie had Sir Ed. Cook here thus distinguished in the case of Laymen Knights Esquires as he doth in case of Abbots Priors and Religious persons that if the King had by his Writ called any Laymen Knight ot Esquire to the Lords House of Parliament by his general Writ who held of him in fee or fee tayl per Baroniam and was a Baron by tenure that this had enobled him and his posterity as Barons he could not refuse to serve the King as a Baron in this Common Councel for the good of his Country his opinion might have passed for good Law For such who had lands in fee or fee tayl of the King by an intire Barony being Barons and Peers of the Realm by their very tenures ought of right by the express words of the Statute of Clarindon the Great Charter of King John and by the Common Law and Custom of the Realm to be summoned as Barons by the Kings special writs directed to them to all Parliaments and great Councils of the Realm by vertue of their Tenures as well as Bishops Abbots Peers and other regular Prelates who held by Barony yet the writ in this case doth not make them and their heirs Barons by writ nor give them a right to sit and vote in Parliament but only declare them and their heirs to be Barons and to sit there as Barons by their Tenure not by vertue of the Writ it self But if the King by this general Writ summon any Layman Knight or Esquire to the Lords House who holds not by Barony this doth no more make him a Lord or Baron in perpetuity to him and his heirs nor no more oblige him or his heirs to sit there than Abbots but that they may refuse to serve in Parliam if he were no Peer before being not obliged by any Law to sit and serve therein as a Baron or Member of the House of Peers by the Writ alone which doth not bind an Abbot Prior or regular Prelate or ennoble him and his Successors to be Peers and Barons of the Realm though they hold only by Frankalmoign not by Barony the Tenure By Barony being that alone which obligeth both of them to sit and serve in Parliament unlesse they be created Dukes Earls Viscounts Lords Peers or Barons by Patent or else by a special Wrir wherein the estate and dignity of a Baron is both created and limited as in the Writ that created Sir Henry de Bromflet Baron of Vescey in the 27 year of King Henry the 6 where after the Nullatenus omittatiâ— this Clâ—se is inserted Volumus enim vos haeredes vestros maâ—culos de corpore vestro legitime exeuntes BARONES DE UESCY EXISTERE Teste c. If a Layman who holds not by Barony be created a Duke Earl Baron or other Peer of the Realm for life in tayl or in fee by Letters Patents or an Abbot or Prior who holds not by Barony and his Successors be created Lords of Parliament by a special Patent of the King as Richard Banham Abbot of Tavestoke and his Successors were bâ— King Hen. the 8. to whom the King granâ—ed by special words Ut eorum quilibet qui pro tempore fuerit Abbâ—s sit erit unus de Spiritualâ—bus religiosis DOMINIS PARLIAMENTI NOSTRI haeredum successorum nostrorum gaudendo honoreâ— Privilegio libertaribus ejusdem This obligeth them to appear and serve in Parliament upon every Writ of Summons and they their heirs males and Successors cannot refuse to serve or voluntarily absent themselves without cause or license under pain of being fined

was again resolved in another Parliamentary Assembly held that year by King Henry the first the Bishops Abbots Great men and Nobles of the Realme as you read before p. 173. Anno 1109. there sprung up another â—ot contest between Arch-Bishop Anselme and Thomas Elect of York about the oath of subjection and canonical obedience which was again debated and after Anselmes death again debated and finally setled in another Parliamentary Council by the King Bishops Nobles and Barons of the Realme of which at large before p. 174 175 176 177. The same Debate coming again between Ralph Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Thurstan of York after his returne from Exile Anno 1121. was again concluded omnium Concilio Episcoporum Principum Procerum Regni p. 180. After many years intestine bloody wars between the perjured Usurper King Stephen Mawde and Duke Henry her Son for the Crown of England Anno 1153. apud Walingford in conventu Episcoporum et aliorum Regni Optimatum there was a final accord made between Stephen and Henry touching the inheritance and descent of the Crown that Stephen should adopt and constitute Henry for his son heir and successor to the Crown of England immediately after his death which Stephen should enjoy during his life yet so as that Henry should bee chief Justice and Ruler of the Kingdome under him This accord made between them by the Prelates Earles and Barons of the Realme was ratified by King Stephens Charter and subscribed by all the Bishops Earles and Barons in their Parliamentary Council at Walingford The difference and suit between King Henry the 2d and Roderic King of Conact in Ireland touching his Kingship Royalties Dominions Services Homage Loyalty and Tribute to King Henry were heard decided and a final agreement made between them in a great Parliamentary COUNCIL held at Windeshores Anno 1175. wherein King Henry the 2d and his Son with the Arch-bishops Bishops Earles and Barons of England without any Commons were present who made and subscribed this agreement recorded at large in Houeden where you may peruse it King Henry the 2d Anno 1177. Celebrato generali CONCILIO apud Northampton after the feast of St. Hilary by the advice of his Nobles restored to Robert Earl of Leicester all his Lands on this side and beyond the Sea as hee had them fifteen daies before the Warre except the Castles of Mounsorel and Pasci Hee likewise therein restored to Hugh Earle of Chester all the lands which hee had fifteen daies before the warre and gave to William de Abbine Son of William Earle of Arundel in the County of Southsex And in the same Council Deane Guido resigned into the hand of Richard Arch-Bishop of Canterbury the deanery of Walteham and all his right which hee had in the Church of Walteham quietum clamavit simpliciter absolute similiter fecerunt canonici seculares de Walteham de praebendis suis resignantes eas in manis Archiepiscopi sed Dominus Rex dedit eis inde plenariam recompensationem ad Domini Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi aestimationem Deinde Dominus Rex authoritate Papae Domini instituit in eadem Ecclesia de Walteham canonicos regulares de diversis domibus Angliae sumptos constituit Walterum de Garent canonicum sumptum de Ecclesia de Osencie Abbatem primum super congregationem illam magnis redditibus domibus pulcherrimis dotavit illos And then hee expelled the Nunnes out of the Monastery of Ambresbury for their incontinency and distributed them into other Nunneries there to bee kept more strictly under restraint and gave the Abby of Ambresbury to the Abbesse and house of Frum Everoit to hold it for ever Sanctius King of Navar and Alfonso King of Castile in the year 1177. submitted the differences between them concerning certain Lands Territories Towns and Castles to the determination of King Henry the 2d who thereupon summoned a Parliamentary Council of his Bishops Earles Nobles and Barons to hear and decide it by their advice Wherein the case being propounded debated and opened before them by the Ambassadours and Advocates of both Kings appeared to be this That King Sanctius during the minority of King Alphonsus an Orphant his Nephew Pupil and innocent from any crime unjustly and forcedly took from him without any demand hearing or Title divers Territories Towns and Lands there specified which his Ancestors had enjoyed and of right descended to him which hee forcibly detained Whereof hee demanded restitution and dammages On the other side Sanctius complained that Alphonsus the Emperour Father of this Alphonsus had by force of armes unjustly dispossessed his Grandfather of the Kingdome of Navarre after whose death Garsias his Nephew and next heir by the help of his friends and subjects recovered the greatest part thereof from the Emperour but not all Who dying leaving his Son Alphonso an infant with whom Sanctius made a league for ten years Alphonso during the League took by force of armes divers Castles Towns and Lands from Sanctius being his inheritance who thereupon demanded restitution both of the Castles Towns Lands and Territories taken from his Grandfather by Alphonsus his Father and from himself by Alphonsus together with the maine profit of the latter quia sine ordine judiciario ejectus est King Henry having fully heard their cases by the Advice and Assent of his Bishops Earles and Barons adjudged that both these Kings should make mutual restitution of what had been forcibly taken from either party together with the mean profits and dammages for part of them by an award and judgement under his Great Seal subscribed by all his Bishops Earles and Barons which recites super quaerelis vero praetaxatis de castellis terris cum omnibus terris pertinentis suis hinc inde violenter et injuste ablatis cum nichil contra Violentiam utrinque objectam Ã parte alterutra alteri responderetur nec quicquam quo minus restitutiones quas petebant faciendas essent alligaretur Plenariam utrinque parti supradictorum quae in jure petita erant fieri restitutionem adjudicabimus A clear Parliamentary resolution and judgement in point That Territories Lands Towns Castles injuriously taken by one King from another by force of armes and warre without just Title to them ought in Law and Justice to bee restored to the right heirs and owners of them and that Conquest and the longest Sword are no good Titles in Law or conscience against the right heir or inheriter which I desire those Sword-men and Lawyers who now pretend us a conquered Nation determine Conquest or the longest Sword a just Title to the Crowns Lands Revenues Offices Inheritances Houses Estates of other men now sadly to consider together with the sacred Texts Hab. 7. Micha 2.1 2 3 4 5. Job 20.10 18 19 20. Obad. 10. to 17. Ezek. ch 19. 35. Isa 33.1 1 King 21.1 to 25. Matth. 21.33 to 41. Luk. 20.14 to 17. ch 19.8

Gulielmus Nubrigensis relates Qâ—cunque Rege tyrannice occiderat eo ipso personam et potestatem Regiam induens suo quoque occisori tandem post modicum fortunam inveteratae consuetudinis lege relicturus Quippe ut dicitur Ã centum retrÃ² annis et eo amplius cum Regum ibidem numerosa successio fuerit Nullus eorum senio aut morbo vitam finivit fed omnes ferro interiere suis interfectoribus tanquam legitimis successoribus regni fastigium relinquentes ut scilicet omnes qui tanto tempore ibidem imperasse noscuntur illud quod Scriptum est respicere videatur OCCIDISTI INSUPER ET POS SEDISTI Wherefore to prevent the dangerous Consequences of these false Glosses on the Statutes of 25 E. 3. c. 2. 11 H. 7. c. 1. I shall lay down these infallible grounds 1. That all publike Laws are and ought to be founded in Justice righteousnes and common honesty for the preserving securing the lives persons estates of all men especially of lawful Kings and Supreme Magistrates from all violence invasion force disseisins usurpations conspiracies assassinations being against all rules of Law and Justice Exod. 20.12 to 18. c. 21 22. 23. Mat. 5.17 to 48. c. 7. 12. Deut. 4.18 Psal 19.8.9 Ps 119.7.106 137 138Â·160 167. Rom. 7.12 Deut. 6.25 Ps 33.5 Ps 45.7 Ps 72.2 Ps 74.15 Prov. 8.18 Prov. 24.21 Rom. 13.1 to 7. Lu. 20.25 Tit. 3.1 2 3. 1 Tim 1.9 10. Job 20.19 c. 24.2 Mich. 2.1 2 3 4. Jer. 6.7 c. 20.8 c. 22.3.17 Ezech. 45. c. Hab. 1 2. to 10. Lu. 3.14 Whence Cicero thus defines Law Lex est ratio summa insita in natura quae jubet ea justa quae facienda sunt prohibe que contraria Therefore these 2. Statutes were purposely made for those great ends and ought to be interpreted onely for the best advantage of Lawfull Kings and their adherents not for the indemnity impunity encouragement of Traytors Rebels Intruders Usurpers 2ly What Tully writes of the Roman Senators we ought to doe the same of our English Parliaments and Legislators Ea virtute et sapientia majores nostri fuerunt ut legibus scribendis nihil sibi aliud quam salutem atque utilitatem reipublicae proponerent Whence he there inferrs A Legibus nihil convenit arbitrari nisi quod reipublicae conducat proficisci quoniam ejus causa sunt comparatae Therefore these Laws are to be interpreted for the best security safety preservation of the lawfull heads of the Commonwealth and their rightfull heirs and loyal dutifull subjects not for their destruction and the indemnity security of Usurpers Traytors Rebels aspiring after their Crowns Thrones Assassinations to the publike ruine 3ly All the branches of the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 2. made at the special request of the Lords and Commons and that by a lawful King at that season declare this Statute to be meant only of a lawful King whiles living whether in or out of actual possession of the Realm not of a bare Usurper in possession without right as Sir Edward Cooke expounds it else it will necessarily follow That it shall be no Treason at all to compasse or imagine the death of the King de jure if once dispossessed for a time by Violence and Treason or of his Queen or eldest son and heir or to violate his Queen or eldest daughter not married or to levy war against the lawfull King in his Realm or to be adherent to his Enemies within the Realm or elsewhere or to counterfeit his Great or Privy Seal or mony c. But high Treason in all these particulars in relation only to the Vsurper in possession without and against all right and Title which would put all our rightful Kings and Supreme Governors into a farr worser sadder condition than their Trayterous Vsurpers and into a worse plight than every Disseisee or lawfull heir intruded upon by abatement or dispossessed by torcions unjust or forcible entries for which our Common and Statute Laws have provided many speedy and effectual means of recovering their possessions and Damages too against Disseisorâ— Abators Intruders on their Inheritances Freeholds for exemplary punishment fining imprisonment of the Disseisors Abaters but no means of recovery at all for our dishinherited disposseâ—ed Kings or their heirs against Intruders Vsurpers of their Crowns nor punishments against them their Confederates or Adherents if our Laws concerning Treasons extend not unto them though Kings de jure but only to Usurpers de facto et non de jure and if the Statute of 11 H. 7. exempt them from all kinds of penalties forfeitures by the lawfull King when he regains possession of the Crown as some now expound them 4ly It is resolved both by our Statutes Judges Law-books over and over That there is no Inter-regnum in our hereditary kingdom or any other That so soon as the rightfull hereditary King dies the Crown and Realm immediatly descend unto and are actually vested in the person and possession of the right heir before either he be actually proclaimed or crowned King and that it is high Treason to attempt any thing against his Person or royal authority before his Coronation because he is both King de jure de facto too as was adjudged in Watsons and Clerks case Hill 1. Jacobi Hence upon the death of King Henry the 3. though Prince Edward his heir was absent out of the Realm in the holy wars where he received a dangerous wound by an assassinate and was not certainly known to be alive yet all the Nobility Clergy and people going to the high Altar at Westminster swore fealty and allegeance to him as their King appointed a New Seal and Officers under him qui thesauram Regis pacem regni fideliter custodirent Sicque pax Novi Regis Edwardi in cunctis finibus regni proclamatur Edwardo fidelitatem Jurantes qui si viveret penitus ignorarunt Besides it is both enacted resolved in our Statutes Lawbooks That Nullum tempus occurrit Regi and that when the King is once in legal possession of his Crown Lands or any Lands holden of him by reason of his Praerogative he who enters or intrudes uppon them shall gain no freehold thereby yea if the Kings Tenant dieth and his heir enter into the lands his ancestors held of the King before that he hath done his homage and received seisin of the King though he hath a right of inheritance to the Lands by Law yet he shall gain no freehold and if he die yet his wife shall not be indowed because he gained no freehold by his entry but only a naked possessioÌ„ much les then shal a meer Intruder gain any Freeheld or interest in the Crown or Crown lands it self to the prejudice of the rightfull King or his heirs This is most evident by the sacred presidents of K. David still King when unjustly dispossessed driven out of his

Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Text snippets containing the quad