Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	create_v	earl_n	son_n	11,263	5	5.7311	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77858	An humble examination of a printed abstract of the answers to nine reasons of the House of Commons, against the votes of bishops in Parliament. Printed by order of a committee of the honourable House of Commons, now assembled in Parliament.	Burges, Cornelius, 1589?-1665.	1641 (1641)	Wing B5672; Thomason E164_14; ESTC R21636	38,831	83

suppose the next thing too that Bishops are in the same manner there for their successors in the Land and Honour that pertaine to their places as the Earles and Barons are for their successors in their owne Lands and Honours For is there no difference betweene Successors that usually have no naturall legitimate relation to the present Bishops in any degree of consanguinity or affinity and those of Earles and Barons which are their proper heires at Law and may claime and must enjoy the same Honour which their Ancestors have held before them if not tainted in bloud No difference betweene those that can no more bee denyed place in Parliament without confusion of all than the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome and the government thereof can be turned up by the Roots and those who first crept in by favour to serve a Conquerors turne by taking off their dependance upon the Pope and fastening it upon himselfe and can derive no higher for sitting as now they doe in the House of Peeres than an Act of Parliament if so high and therefore by another Act of Parliament may be discharged Now where the difference of the Title is so great between a Bishop and an Earle or Temporall Baron both to their Lands and Honours and Votes in Parliament I much feare that the Nobility and Temporall Lords will hardly in their House allow this doctrine which yet is fitter for them to consider of than for me to confute and therefore I leave it only with this that if the Lords shall find cause to reject this position as heterodox and deny the Bishops to be in Parliament for their successors in Lands and Honours in the same manner or upon as good and immoveable title as the Nobility be for theirs then the Reason of the House of Commons doth stand yet good as to Earles and Barons and it is no way fit that Bishops should have the same Legislative power over the Honours inheritances persons and liberties of Earles and Barons as these have or ought to have over those of Bishops As for Bishops holding their Lands in Fee simple I can say little to it because my skill is very simple in Tenures Only I have beene told that Fee-simple Littletons Instit l. 1. c. 1. 5. 1. Cokus in Little ibid. Sect. 5. is called in Latine foedum simplex idem est quod haereditas legitima vel hareditas pura So that to speak properly Every man that hath a lawfull estate in Fee-simple hath it either by descent or purchase neither of which wayes for ought I know can the Bishop derive his Title But perhaps in some sense wherewith I am not acquainted the Bishops may bee said to hold in Fee-simple as the word may be taken in a larger and lesse proper acception Viz. Because he holdeth Lands in fee in right of his Church but this is not properly Fee-simple because he holds them not in his owne right and the right he hath in them dyes with him as to his heires But I have heard that ordinarily he that is seized of any Lands in Fee in right of his Church his tenure is either that which the Lawyers call Tenure per divine service when the Lands are given upon condition that the Donee performe some divine Service certaine expressed in the Gift or the Lands to revert or else it is * Littl. Institut li. 2. cap. 6. en Frank annoigne when Lands are freely given without any divine service certaine to be performed for them And further albeit the Bishops are usually said to hold of the King per Baroniam yet this haply may be meant rather of the Honour affixed to their place which works it up to a Dignitie than of the Lands pertaining to them which they also hold in Frank almoigne as well as the inferiour Clergy Sir Henry Spel. Not. in Concil v rolam sub Ossa Hereupon it is that in our Municipall Lawes our Bishops for that they enjoy their meanes and maintenance by the bounty and Almes of Kings are called Barones Regis Eleemosynarij The Kings Lords Almesmen or Barons of the Kings Almoignry as the Almesmen at WINDSOR are called The Kings poore Knights and the Reason is rendred out of Ranulphus de Glanvill that famous Iudge in Henry the second his time quia eorum Baroniae sunt de Eleemosyna Domini Regis Antecessorum ejus De Legib. Angl. l. 7. ca. 1. in Calic Because their BARONIES are of the Almes of the KING and his Ancestors Which being so my conceit is that what Reason so ever they have on their side yet at this time especially this free and high language that they holding their Lands in Fee-simple may with as good Reason Vote in the Honours inheritance persons and liberties of others as others may and doe in theirs might have well beene forborne without prejudice to their Cause For if Almesmen bee admitted to Vote in Parliament it will bee their wisedome I take it not to bee so much elated as to enter into termes of comparison with the highest not excepting their Benefactors or Founders themselves even in one of the highest points of honour and power 2. ANSWER to the fifth REASON Many Peeres have beene created for their lives only and the Earle of Surrey for the life of his Father who yet voted in this House EXAMEN But have any except Bishops beene created Peeres for life or otherwise that were not men of great estates and inheritance or at least of extraordinary birth and sufficiency Of such eminency were the Earles of Surrey But when you mention an Earle of Surrey whom do you meane Is it intended of the Noble Family of the Howards descended from the Mowbrayes If of these you will hardly finde any such that being an honour not so frequently communicated in former times Indeed I I find it mentioned that Iohn Lord Mowbray Sonne of Iohn Grand-child to Thomas Duke of Norfolke was by King Henry the sixth in the life time of his Father created Earle of Surrey and was after his Fathers death Duke of Norfolke but that he was a Peere of Parliament for or in the life of his Father I finde not And I have beene told by a Noble branch of that Renowned stemme and now a Peere that there was no Earle of Surrey made a Lord of Parliament upon such termes But whether so or so it matters not much this being but one single instance And how ever you may perhaps instance when you please in others not so highly descended who have had the honour to Vote as Peeres in Parliament yet they were such whose interests in the publike and share in posterity must needs weigh downe any of those that the House of Commons desire to have removed out of the Lords House For however diverse of them bee well lined with wealth yet the House of Commons are in Parliament to looke upon them as the Lawes doe to wit as upon Almesmen that are but