Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	hold_v	king_n	tenure_n	3,330	5	12.6135	5	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A37240	The question concerning impositions, tonnage, poundage, prizage, customs, &c. fully stated and argued, from reason, law, and policy dedicated to King James in the latter end of his reign / by Sir John Davies ...	Davies, John, Sir, 1569-1626.	1656 (1656)	Wing D407; ESTC R1608	63,423	186

an 150. years after that no Impositions were layd upon Merchandizes by Prerogative but the Princes who succeeded Edw. 3. untill Queen Mary did forbear to use their Prerogative in that kind for those other notable and true causes which are before at large expressed in the seventeenth Chapter Lastly touching the Imposition of six shillings and eight pence upon every Cloth laid by Queen Mary after the losse of Callis she held the same with a new Imposition upon French Wines without any question during her life and albeit complaint were made against the Imposition set upon Cloaths unto Queen Elizabeth upon her first entry as it is usuall for the people to complain of burthens and charges upon every change of Government Yet we find that after the Conference of the Judges spoken of by my Lord Dyer 1 Eliz. f. 165. Dyer though their resolution be not their reported Queen Elizabeth did continue that Imposition and also the Impost upon French Wines as being lawfull set for the space of fourty four years without any further contradiction besides Queen Elizabeth did raise divers other new Impositions as is before declared whereunto there was never made any opposition during her Reign and which His Majesty that now is hath received without any question for the space of fifteen years and thus much may suffice for answer to the several points in the third Objection CHAP. XXVIII The fourth Objection that the Prerogative is bound or taken away by divers Acts of Parliament FOurthly It is objected That though it were granted and admitted that the King de jure communi hath a rightful Prerogative to lay Impositions upon Merchandizes yet that power say they is restrained and taken away by sundry Acts of Parliament First the Statute of Magna Charta cap. 30. doth give safe conduct and free passage to all Merchants to buy and sell absque aliquibus malis tolnetis per antiquas rectas consuetudines Secondly by the Act or Charrer of confirmation in 25 Edw. 3. The King doth release a Mayltolt of fourty shillings upon a Sack of Wooll and doth grant for him and His Heirs unto the Commons that he shall not take such things without the Commons consent or good will and in the same Act or Charter reciting that wheras divers people of the Realm were in fear that the Aids and Taxes which they had given to the King before that time was towards his War and other businesses of their own grant and good will might turn to a bondage of them and their heirs because in time to come they might be found in the Rolls and were likewise grieved for Prizes taken throught the Realm The King doth grant for him and his Heirs That he will not draw such Ayds Taxes or Prizes into a Custome for any thing that had been done before that time be it by Roll or any other president that may bee found Thirdly by the Statute 14 Edw. 3. cap. 12. the King doth grant that all Merchants Denizens and Aliens may freely come into the Realm with their goods and Merchandizes and freely tary there and safely return paying their Customes Subsidies and profits thereof reasonably due Fourthly by the Statute 11 Rich. 2. cap. 9. it is enacted That no Imposition or Charge be put upoÌ„ Wools Wooll-fells or Leather other than the Custome or Subsidie granted to the King in that Parliament if any be the same to be adnulled and repealed saving to the King his ancient right there are other Acts of Parliament containing the same sence and substance but these principally have been singled out and cited as specially Statutes restraining and taking away the Kings Prerogative in laying Impositions upon Merchandizes CHAP. XXIX The Answer to the fourth Objection TO this Objection first I answer That this being a Prerogative in point of Government as well as in point of profit it caÌ„not be restrained or bound by Act of Parliament it cannot be limited by any certain or fixt Rule of Law no more than the course of a Pilot upon the Sea who must turn the Helme or bear higher or lower sail according to the wind and weather and therefore it may be properly said That the Kings Prerogative in this point is as strong as Samson it cannot be bound for though an Act of Parliament be made to restrain it and the King doth give his consent unto it as Samson was bound with his own consent yet if the Philistins come that is if any just or important occasion do arise it cannot hold or restrain the Prerogative it will be as thred and broken as easie as the bonds of Samson and again Ius imponendi vectigalia inhaeret sceptro saith the Law Imperiall quod Sceptro inhaeret non potest tolli nisi sublato Sceptro The Kings Prerogatives are the Sun-beams of his Crown and as inseparable from it as the Sun-beams from the Sun The Kings Crown must be taken from his head before his Prerogative can be taken away from him Samsons hair must be cut off before his courage can be any jot abated Hence it is that the Kings Act nor any Act of Parliament can give away His Prerogative for in his own Act the King cannot release a tenure in Capite nor grant it to any Subject Dyer 44. If the King grant Land to I. S. to hold as freely as the King himselfe holds his Crown he shall hold his Land still of the King in Capite and if he Alien it hee shall pay a Fine for the tenure is vested in the King by his Prerogative saith the Book 14. Hen. 6. 12. and therefore when King Fdw. 3. did grant unto the Black Prince his eldest Son the Dutchy of Cornwall una cum omnibus wardis maritagiis releviis c. non obstante Prerogative Regis the Prince could not seize a Ward that held of the Kings Ward who held in Capite of the King because it belonged to the King by his Prerogative 34 Ass. pl. 25. whereby it is manifest that the King by his own Grant cannot sever his Prerogative from the Crown nor communicate any part thereof to any one not to the Prince his eldest Son and in this case of Tenure it was resolved in the last Assembly of Parliament in England That no Act of Parliament could be framed by the wit of man whereby all Tenures of the Crown might be extinguished neither can any Act of Parliament in the flat Negative take away the Kings Prerogative in the affirmative The King hath a Prerogative in the affirmation that he may pardon all Malefactors There is a Statute made at Northampton 2 Edw. 3. That no Charter of pardon for killing a man shold thenceforth be granted but in one case where one man killeth another in his own defence by misfortune Hath this Statute so bound the Prerogative as no man ever since hath been pardoned for killing a man but in the cases before mentioned The King hath

and stoned to death for blasphemy and then he took it for a lawfull Escheat but when the King doth lay an Imposition upon Merchandizes without the consent of the Merchants and doth cause the Officers of his Customes to take and levie the same it seems say they they take away the goods of the Subject without his consent and without cause of forfeiture which is not warranted either by Law of Nations which brought in property nor by the Law of the Land which doth maintain property CHAP. XXIII The Answer to the first Objection TO this Objection we answer That the King doth not take the Land or Goods of any without his consent but here we must distinguish there is a particular and expresse consent and there is an implicit and general consent when a man doth give his Goods or surrender his Lands to the King by deed enrolled or when in Parliament which representeth the body of the whole Realm and wherein every man doth give his consent either by himself or his Deputy A subsidy is granted to the King there is an expresse consent but when subjects who live under a Royall Monarchy do submit themselves to the obedience of that Law of that Monarchy whatsoever the Law doth give to that Monarch the subjects who take the benefit of the Law in other things and doe live under the protection of the Law doe agree to that which the Law gives by an implicit and general consent and therefore there are many cases where the King doth lawfully take the goods of a Subject without his particular expresse consent though the same be not forfeited for any crime or contempt of the Owner If a Theef do steal my goods and waive them the King may lawfully take those goods without my particular consent and without any fault or forfeiture of mine but in regard I live under the Law which giveth such wayves unto the King he taketh not the same without my implicit consent so if my Horse kill a man the King may lawfully take my Horse a Deodand without my fault or consent in particular but in that I have consented to the obedience of the Law which giveth all Deodands to the King he taketh not my Horse without the implicit or generall consent of mine In the time of War the King doth take my House to build a Fort or doth build a Bulwark upon my Land he doth me no wrong though he doth it without my consent for my implicit consent doth concur with it for that I being a member of the Common-weal cannot but consent to all Acts of necessity tending to the preservation of the Common-wealth So if the King doth grant me a Fair or Market with a power to take a reasonable Toll If a man will buy any thing in my Fair or Market I may take Toll of him though I give no particular consent to the grant because the Law whereunto every Subject doth give consent and obedience doth warrant the taking of Toll in every Market and Fair granted by the King So it is in case of Impositions the Law doth warrant the Kings Prerogative to impose upon Merchandizes as is before declared and therefore though the Merchants give not their particular consents to the laying of these Impositions yet in regard they live under the protection and obedience of the Law which submits it self to this Prerogative and allow and approve the same it cannot be said that the King doth take these Impositions of them without their implicit and generall consent CHAP. XXIV Of the second Objection touching the uncertainty and unbounded largenesse of this Prerogative THe second Objection is against the uncertainty and unlimited largenesse of this Prerogative for in other cases they say where the King taketh the goods of a Subject by his Prerogative there is a certainty what he may take as in the case of wayvs he may take onely the goods wayved and no more In case of Deodand he may take only the thing that causeth the death of a man and no more In case of wreck he may take only the goods that are wreckt and no more In case of Wardship of Land holden in Capite the King may take the profits of the Land till the Heir sues his Livery and no longer In case where the King hath Annum Diem vastum hee may retain of the Lands of the Felon attainted which are holden of other Lords for a year and a day and no longer In all these cases there is a certainty what the King shall have and how long he shall have it but in case of Imposition the quantity or rate thereof high or low is left to the Kings own will or pleasure so as if he should be mis-led as many Princes have been with evill Counsell he might with his Prerogative doe hurt the CoÌ„mon-wealth by laying too heavy burthens upon his Subjects for though hetherto his Majesty hath imposed upon Merchandizes only twelve pence on the pound over and above the ancient Custome and the Subsidies granted by Parliament yet this Prerogative being unlimitted he may hereafter say they set five shillings or ten shillings upon the pound if it please him and so undoe the Merchants or discontinue and overthrow all Trade and Comerce CHAP. XXV The Answer to the second Objection TO this Objection the fittest answer is That it is an undutifull Objection and withall too busie too bold and too presumptuous for it is an Objection against the wisdome of the King in point of Government and against the bounty and goodnesse of the King towards his people the Text of the Civil Law cited before doth call it a kind of Sacrilege to dispute of Princes Judgments or Actions and for the Law of England sure I am that it trusteth the Wisdome and Judgement of the King alone in matter of greater importance than in laying of Impositions or setting of rates upon Merchandizes Is not the Kings wisdome only trusted with the absolute power of making War and Peace with forein Nations whereby hee may when hee pleaseth interrupt all Trade of Merchandizing Is not the King alone trusted with the like power of making and decrying of monies which is the onely Medium of all Traffique and Comerce Is not he solely and without limitation trusted with the nomination and creation of all Judges and Magistrates who are to give Judgement in cases concerning the Liberties Lands and Lives of all his Subjects hath not he a sole and unlimited power to pardon all Malefactors to dispence with all penal Laws to distribute all Honours to grant to whom he pleaseth Protections Denizations Exemptions not only from Juries but from all other Services of the Common-wealth and yet these Prerogatives if the same be not used with judgement and moderation may prove prejudicial to the Common-wealth as well as the laying of Impositions upon Merchandizes Shall therefore any undutifull Subject make these conclusions The King may have a continuall Warre

Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Text snippets containing the quad