Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n daughter_n elder_a marry_v 10,918 5 9.6530 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A40689 The sovereigns prerogative and the subjects priviledge discussed betwixt courtiers and patriots in Parliament, the third and fourth yeares of the reign of King Charles : together with the grand mysteries of state then in agitation. England and Wales. Parliament.; Fuller, Thomas, 1608-1661. 1657 (1657) Wing F2467; ESTC R16084 264,989 306

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

conteined but particuler Rights of the Subject and nothing at all concerning his Majesties Prerogative Secondly that answer was to give his Majectie satisfaction of all our proceedings in general and no man can assign any particuler in which we have broken it and this Petition justifies it self that in it we have not offended against the protestation and I know no reason but that this declaration should be added to all our Laws we shall agree on this Parliament as well as to this Petition The last reason given was that we have varied in our Petition from the words of Magna Charta and therefore it was well necessary that a saving should be added to the Petition I answer that in the Statute 5. E. 3. 25. E. 3. 28. E. 3. and other Statutes with which Magna Charta is confirmed the words of the Statute of explanation differ from the words of Magna Charta it self the words of some of the Statutes of explanation being that no man ought to be apprehended unless by indictment or due process of Law the other statutes differing from the words of Magna Charta in many other particulars and yet there is no saving in those Statutes much less should there be any in a Petition of Right these are the answers I have conceived to the reasons of their Lordships and the exposition I apprehend must be made of the proposed words being added to our Petition And therefore I conclude that in my opinion we may not consent to this addition which I submit to better Judgements The Reasons of the Commons House delivered by M r. GLANUILE why they cannot admit of the Propositions tendered unto them by the Lords May it please your Lordships I Am commanded by the House of Commons to deliver unto your Lordships their reasons why they cannot admit of the Proposition tendered unto them by you but for an introduction into the busines please you to remember that a Petition of Right was shewed to your Lordships wherein we desired you would joyn with us a Petition my Lords fitting for these times grounded upon Law and seeking no more then the Subjects just Liberty The Petition consisted of 4. parts The first touching Loan Aids and Taxes The second touching imprisonment of mens Persons The third touching Billeting of Souldiers The fourth touching Commissions issued for Martial Law and put in execution upon several Persons Groaning under the burthen of these we desired remedy and wish your Lordships would joyn with us which you having taken into consideration we must confess have dealt nobly and freely with us not to conclude any thing till you hear our just reasons for which we thank your Lordships and hope your Lordships will value those reasons which we shall now offer unto your Lordships The work of this day will make a happy issue if your Lordships please to relinquish this as we formerly upon conference with your Lordships have done some other things For the Proposition my Lords we have debated it throughly in our House and I am commanded to deliver unto you the reasons why we cannot insert this clause Neither your Lordships nor we desire to debate Liberty beyond the due bounds or to incroach upon the Kings Prerogative and lessen the bounds thereof The first reason I am to lay down is touching Soveraign power which I beseech you not to accept as my own being but a weak Member of that strong body but as the reasons of the whole House upon great and grave considerations First my Lords the words Soveraign power hath either reference or no reference to the Petition if no reference then superfluous if a reference then dangerous and operative upon the Petition and we think your Lordships purposes is not to offer unto us any thing that may be vain or to the hinderance of any thing wherein you have already joyned with us The Petition declareth the Right of the Subject which yet may be broken by the word Soveraign power and so the virtue of the Petition taken away The end of the Petition is not to enlarge the bounds of Law but their Liberties being infringed to reduce them to their ancient bounds and shall we by admitting of these words Soveraign power instead of cureing the wound launch it and cut it deeper The next point is the word trust a word of large latitude and deep sence we know that there is a trust in the Crown and King but regulated by Law we acknowledge in penal Statutes the King may grant another power to dispense with the Law but Magna Charta inflicting no penalty leaveth no trust but claimeth his own right therefore the word trust would confound this distinction Our next reason is we think it absolutely repugnant to any course of Parliament to put saving to the Petition In former times the course of petitioning the King was this The Lords and the Speaker either by words or writing preferred their Petition to the King this then was called the Bill of the Commons which being received by the King part he received and part he put out part he retified for as it came from him it was drawn into a Law But this course in 2. H. 5. was found prejudicial to the Subject and since in no such cases they have petitioned by Petition of Right as we now do who come to declare what we demaund of the King For if we should tell him what we should not demaund we should then proceed not in a Parliamentary course Now for that which is alleadged by your Lordships de articulis sup Chartas that my Lords is not like this that is saving upon particulars But this Petition consisting consisting on particulers would be destroyed by a general saving The saving de articulis sup Chartas are of three aids for Ransomming the Kings Person for Knighting the Kings eldest Son and once for Marrying the Kings eldest Daughter These by the form of the Petition shew that they came not in upon the Kings answer but upon the Petition First then followed the savings which under favour we think are no reasons to make us accept of this saving being not pertinent to the Petition These 23. Statutes 34. E. 1. were made to confirm Magna Charta so that there are in all 30. Acts to set Magna Charta in its purity and if some subsequent Statute have laid some blemish upon it shall we now then make the subject in worse case by laying more weight upon it God forbid In the next place your Lordships reason thus that this which you wish we would admit of is no more then what we formerly did profess when we sent the King word we had no purpose at all to trench upon his prerogatives It is true my Lords we did so but this was not annexed to any Petition for in that manner we should never have done it And here I am commanded with your favours to deliver unto you what a Learned Member of the House delivered unto our House