Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	hereditament_n	service_n	tenement_n	1,456	5	10.3923	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A29573	An apologie of John, Earl of Bristol consisting of two tracts : in the first, he setteth down those motives and tyes of religion, oaths, laws, loyalty, and gratitude, which obliged him to adhere unto the King in the late unhappy wars in England : in the second, he vindicateth his honour and innocency from having in any kind deserved that injurious and merciless censure, of being excepted from pardon or mercy, either in life or fortunes.	Bristol, John Digby, Earl of, 1580-1654.	1657 (1657)	Wing B4789; ESTC R9292	74,883	107

Fire nor the Roman Catholiques by reason of the Oath of Supremacy the Halter Whereupon it was again desired by the Houses that Treason might be reduced into a certainty according to the Statute of the 25 of Edw. the 3. which was accordingly so enacted the 2. of Phil. and Ma. And all these three Statutes 25 Edw. 3. 1 Hen. 4. and 2 Phil. and Ma. are yet in force In which the attempting of any thing against the Kings Person the adhering to the Kings Enemies the leavying War against the King The seizing of any of his Forts or his Ships Royal The Counterfeiting of the Kings Hand or his great or privy Seal with many other particulars are so explicitely and clearly enacted to be high Treason That whosoever should be guilty of the Fact would have as ill a Plea to plead That ●unius Brutus Buchanan or any of our new Doctors did hold and maintain by their writings That it is lawfull in such and such Cases to take Armes against the King and so consequently in all the other particulars specified in the said Statute As a Felon that had rob'd upon the high way would have to plead that Theft by the Law of God is not punishable by death for which he would not want likewise his * Authors But such as have been acquainted with the Courses held with those that have been Indicted and Arraigned for Treason will know That to be proceeded against only upon the plain and clear letter of the Law is to have favourable Iustice And he shall have the Kings Atturny and the learned Counsel with Eloquence and great strains of Wit by Deductions and Inferences as though they had lost the day if the Accused should be acquitted stretch the litteral Text beyond what it can rationally or honestly bear and speaking as they say for the King no man dares reprove or restrain them But to suppose that any Allegation of Conscience or the Opinion of learned Authors nay if it were Texts out of Scripture against the explicite letter of the Law would be heard or admitted were a great Ignorance But he would be told as I know some have been That all other things were Matters dehors Nothing to the purpose The issue was only factum or non factum And truly wofull experience had taught me to be wary in humane prudence not to imbarque my self in a Business wherin my Conscience was not only altogether unsatisfied but if I should ever be brought to a legal Tryal upon it mine own Judgment told me I could have nothing to say in mine own Defence of Justification or that could preserve my Self and Posterity from total Ruine and Destruction but Prevailing and Victory Which at the most could but protect but could not make a bad Cause good But besides humane Prudence and fear of Punishment there is a Conscientious Tye of obeying the Law we being taught to obey not only for wrath but for Conscience sake S. Paul saith That if there had been no Law there had been no sinne which sheweth That the breaking of just Laws and legally established is sin For the supream Powers therein are chiefly disobeyed who are supposed to command more Authoritatively by their Laws than by their Verbal Commands Further as the Laws are so positive against Resistance and taking Arms against the King so likewise have the Laws been as carefull to Protect and thereby to Incourage the Subject to adhore unto their King for it is provided by the Stat. 11 of Hen. 7. Cap. 1. That from henceforth no manner of person or persons whatsoever he or they be that attend upon the King and Soveraign Lord of this Land for the time being in his Person and do him true and faithfull service of Allegience in the same or be in other places by his Commandement in his Wars within this Land or without That for the said deed true duty of Allegeance he or they be no wise Convict or Attaint of high Treason nor of other offences for that Cause by Act of Parliament or otherwise by any Process of Law whereby he or any of them shall lose or forfeit Life Land Tenements Rents Possessions Hereditaments Goods Chattels or any other things but to be for that deed and service utterly discharged of any Vexation Trouble or Losse And if any Act or Acts or other Process of the Law hereafter thereupon for the same happen to be made contrary to this Ordinance That then that Act or Acts or other Process of the Law whatsoever they shall be stand and be utterly void Provided alwaies That no Person or Persons shall take any benefit or advantage by this Ast which shall hereafter decline from his or their said Allegeance So that if they that have served the King with Fidelity according to the Law shall by their prevailing fellow-Subjects be attainted and their Estates forfeited and disposed of at their pleasure It must be by some such Transcendent Power as must be above all Laws For as by the Law no Subject ought either to be attainted or lose his Estate for serving the King in his Wars so can no Confiscations by the Law belong to any but unto the King or such as derive their Right from him It is true in the Heat and Contestation of War it is usual that whatsoever Goods or Wealth the souldier can lay hands upon is de facto esteemed good Purchase But after the War is ended the Law useth then to recover her Force And setled Inheritances in all former Civill Wars in England have never been disposed of by the Arbitrary Power of the prevailing Party although they were Kings claiming the Crown by Title and might have Right to Confiscations but by legal Convictions and due course of Law much more in the Case of Subjects taking Arms against their King which is alwaies in the beginning stiled and proclaimed Rebellion by the King that they Oppose untill Success or Treaty qualifie that Name That they should not content themselves with a General Pardon and Act of Oblivion and the settlement of the Government for the future to their reasonable Content and Security for themselves and their Estates But that Inheritances must be confiscated and disposed of by them and such persons as they shall please without legal Tryal and as it were by Proscription or Decimation be by a Vote designed to loss of Life and Estate without Pardon or Mercy What greater Cruelty could have been used towards them if they had faln into the hands of the Turk or most merciless Conquerour especially if it shall be considered that in this Case no Neutrality could be admitted nor the most peaceable-minded man avoid the being ingaged For as by the Law it is Treason to take Armes against the King by the above-recited Statutes so by the Statute of the 19 Hen. 7. It is loss of all Honours Castles Lordships Mannors Lands Tenements and other Hereditaments c. not to take Armes for the King and