Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	duke_n	earl_n	john_n	48,781	5	6.3855	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54581	The obligation resulting from the Oath of Supremacy to assist and defend the pre-eminence or prerogative of the dispensative power belonging to the King, his heirs and successors. In the asserting of that power various historical passages occurring in the usurpation after the year 1641. are occasionally mentioned; and an account is given at large of the progress of the power of dispensing as to acts of Parliament about religion since the reformation; and of divers judgments of Parliaments declaring their approbation of the exercise of such power, and particularly in what concerns the punishment of disability, or incapacity.	Pett, Peter, Sir, 1630-1699.	1687 (1687)	Wing P1884; ESTC R218916	193,183	151

Roman Catholick Physicians and Lawyers had incurr'd by his Acts of Parliament I have told you But what if I should now tell you how afterwards he did take care as it were unâ liturâ to delete the Execution of ●…ll the Penal Laws disabling ones and others against the Roman Catholicks and that as to what he did therein the most zealous Protestants among his Bishops and the Lords Temporal and others of his Privy Council did concur with him in so doing A. I think you would tell me of that which was very strange B. As in the Happy future State of England it was with an intent to detect the Degeneracy and Vanity of the Politick and Protestant-would-be's of the Age who pretended to Advance Religion by Excluding the next Heir in p. 219. shewn that one of the general and publick Articles sent by King James the First to his Embassador in Spain in Order to the Match with the Infanta was that the Children of this Marriage shall no way be compell'd or constrain'd in point of Conscience or Religion wherefore there is no doubt that their title shall be prejudiced in case it should please God that they turn'd Catholicks and that it was afterward sent as an additional Article offer'd from England that the King of Great Britain and Prince of Wales should bind themselves by Oath for the Observance of the Articles and that the Privy Council should sign the same under their Hands and that accordingly the Articles were sign'd by Archbishop Abbot John Bishop of Lincoln Keeper of the Great Seal Lionel Earl of Middlesex Lord high Treasurer of England Henry Viscount Mandevile Lord President of the Council Edward Earl of Worcester Lord Privy Seal Lewis Duke of Richmond and Lennox Lord high Steward of the Houshold James Marquess of Hamilton James Earl of Carlisle Lancelot Bishop of Winchester Oliver Viscount Grandison Arthur Baron Chichester of Belfast Lord Treasurer of Ireland Sir Thomas Edmonds Knight Treasurer of the Houshold Sir John Suckling Comptroller of the Houshold Sir George Calvert and Sir Edward Conway Principal Secretaries of State Sir Richard Weston Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir Julius Caesar Mr. of the Rolls and for the truth of which Facts reference is there made to Mr. Prynne's Introduction to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Trial p. 43 so you may there read it in p. 44. that some private Articles were agreed on and probably were Sworn to by the same Persons that the other general ones were and of which private ones the first was in short That none of the Penal Laws against Roman Catholicks should at any time hereafter be put in Execution But you may thus see it at large viz. That particular Laws made against Roman Catholicks under which other Subjects of our Realms are not comprehended and to whose Observation all generally are not obliged as likewise general Laws under which all are equally Comprised if so be they are such as are repugnant to the Romish Religion shall not at any time hereafter by any means or chance whatsoever directly or indirectly be commanded to be put in Execution against the said Roman-Catholicks And we will cause that our Councel shall take the same Oath as far as it pertains to them and belongs to the Execution which by the hands of them and their Ministers is to be exercised The 2d was That no other Laws shall hereafter be made anew against the said Roman Catholicks but that there shall be a perpetual Toleration of the Roman Catholick Religion within Private Houses throughout all our Realms and Dominions which we will have to be understood as well of our Kingdom of Scotland and Ireland as in England c. And the 4th was That we will interpose our Authority and will do as much as in us shall lie that the Parliament shall approve confirm and ratifie all and singular Articles in favour of the Roman-Catholicks capitulated between the most renowned Kings by reason of this Marriage and that the said Parliament shall revoke and abrogate the particular Laws made against the said Roman-Catholicks c. And the Conclusion there is viz. That we will interpose our Authority and will do as much as in us shall lie that the Parliament shall approve confirm and ratifie all and singular Articles in favour of the Roman-Catholicks capitulated between the most renowned Kings by reason of this Marriage and that the said Parliament shall revoke and abrogate the particular Laws made against the said Roman-Catholicks to whose observance also the rest of our Subjects and Vassals are not obliged as likewise the general Laws under which all are equally comprehended to wit ●…s to the Roman-Catholicks if they be such as is aforesaid which are repugnant to the Roman-Catholick Religion and that hereafter we will not consent that the said Parliament should ever at any time Enact or Write any other new Laws against Roman-Catholicks We accounting all and singular the preceding Articles ratified and accepted out of certain Knowledge as far as they concern us our Heirs or Successors approve ratifie applaud and promise bon●… fide and in the word of a King by these Presents inviolably firmly well and faithfully to keep observe and fulfill the same and to cause them to be kept observed and fulfilled without any Exception or Contradiction and do confirm the same by Oath upon the holy Evangelists notwithstanding any Opinions Sentences or Laws whatsoever to the contrary In the presence of the most Illustrious Don John de Mendoza Marquess of Inojosa and Don Charles Coloma Extraordinary Ambassadors of the Catholick King of George Calvert Knight one of our Chief Secretaries of Edward Conway Knight another of our Chief Secretaries of Francis Cottington Baronet of the Privy Councel to our Son the Prince of Francis de Corondelet Apostolical or the Pope's Prothonotary and Arch-Deacon of Cambray Dated at our Palace at Westminster the 20 day of July 1623. in the English style Jacobus Rex A Compared and true Copy George Calvert Chief Secretary The Form of the Oath which the Lords of the Councel took to the former Articles is this which followeth found among the Lord Cottington's Papers Formula Juramenti à Consiliariis Praestandi Ego N. Iuro me debitè plenéque observaturum quantum ad me spectat omnes singulos Articulos qui in tractatu Matrimonii inter Serenissimum Carolum Walliae Principem Serenissimam Dominam Do●…nam Mariam Hispaniarum I●…fantem continentur IURO ETIAM Quod neque per me nec per Ministrum aliquem inferiorem mihi inservientem legem ullam contra quemcunque Catholicum Romanum conscriptum executioni mandabo aut mandari faciam Poenamve ullam ab earum aliqua irrogatam exigam Sed in omnibus quae ad me pertinent Ordines à Majestate sua ex ea parte constitutos fideliter observabo Thus far Mr. Prynne who verifies the Facts above-mention'd not only from my Lord Cottington's Papers but from the Mercure Francois Tom. 9. A.

Numb 35. 33. A. But by the way do you think then that Sovereign Princes offend the Law of God in Pardoning Murther B. I do observe that many presume to censure Kings for so doing and are superstitiously misguided by thinking that those two places of Scripture referr'd to by my Lord Coke do necessarily make it a sin in Princes to Pardon Murther But I shall when we meet again shew you the mistake of such therein and shall shew you that David at that time when the Law of God and the lex terrae was the same thing and who had Sworn and would perform it that he would keep God's righteous Iudgments was not to be censured to have sinned either in the reprieve of Ioab who had murthered Amasa and Abner and in delaying the Execution of the Law and leaving it to Solomon his Son or in the Pardon of Absolon who had slain his Brother Ammon and that when the Law faith in Numb 35. The Murtherer shall surely be put to death our best Commentators and out of the Rabbins say that this is spoken to the Iudges before whom such Causes regularly came and under the Supreme Power and by authority thereof judged those Causes and that tho the Iudges who were subordinate to the Supreme Power were to take no Satisfaction for the life of a Murtherer but were by that Law to Condemn him yet that it followeth not that the Supreme Power who made them Iudges might not in some Cases Reprieve and Pardon some whom they had Condemned A. I shall be glad to hear you discourse of this and the rather for that 't is so Customary to many when they find the Prince exercising this Prerogative of Pardoning to be apt too much to busy their heads with those two places in the Old Testament to their neglect of others there viz. Exod. 22. 28. Prov. 24. 21. Eccles. 10. 20. and of Acts 23. 5. in the New and likewise there of Rom. 13. 2. 5. 1. St. Peter 2. 17. and from whence they might Collect their moral offices of not doing or speaking or thinking dishonourably of the Lord 's annointed and of paying honour and obedience to his Sovereign Power and that for Conscience sake But in the mean time give me leave à propos to ask you if ever you heard of any one of the Iudges of the Realm in the Reign of our former Princes that gave his judgment for the allowance of the King's Pardon of disability Shew me but that and I shall not be affrighted with my Lord Ch. Justice Vaughan's Simoniacal Dead man. B. I shall tell you of a Case that was well enough known to him and which you may find in Croke 3d p. 55. Sir Iohn Bennet v. Dr. Easedale where you may see that Sir Iohn Bennet being fined 20000 l. for Bribery by the Star-Chamber and Censured to be Imprison'd and made uncapable of any Office of Iudicature and that he having a Pardon from the King reciting the Bribery and Offences mention'd in the Decree and all Penalties and Punishments by reason thereof and all Disabilities and Incapacities and all things concerning the said Sentence except the Fine of 20000 l. and the Court of Star-Chamber having the advice of all the Iudges relating to the Decree and Pardon it was resolv'd by them all that this Pardon hath taken away all force of the Sentence in the Star-Chamber except for the Fine of 20000 l. and all Disabilities are discharged thereby That Lord Chief Iustice knew that as it was set down in that Chapter of Pardons Inst. 3. the King's Pardon extends to all Suits in the Star-Chamber and he knew of what was mention'd Inst. 4. Chap. 1. Of the High Court of Parliament viz. Of a Pardon to the Lord Latimer of a Iudgment in Parliament and he knew that by his own and other Iustices of Assize going into their own Countrys in the Execution of their Offices by vertue of the King 's Non-obstante to the Statutes of 8. R. 2. c. 2. 3. H. 8. c. 24. himself and as many as went Iudges of Assize so into their own Countrys gave Judgment by so doing for the Prerogative of dispensing with such Acts of Parliament and he likewise knew that as it is well express'd in The●… Answer of King Charles the First to the Declaration of both Houses of Parliament concerning the Commission of array A. 1642. An Act of Parliament in any Matter tho mistaken being assented to by the King and his two Houses is equally binding as having equal Authority with an Act introductive of a new Law and that therefore Acts of Parliament having so particularly declared the justness of the Prerogative's dispensing with disability no magna nomina of any particular Sages of the Law in otherwise opining can expect any deference And if you will consider what my Lord Coke in that Chapter of Pardons hath mention'd of the operation of Prerogative over the dead in Law and consider the President he refers to viz. Pasch. 22. E. 3. tit Cor. 239. Coram Rege Quidam indictatus de Felonia inde Culp dicit quod Rex eum Conduxit inde producit Chartam quod Rex eum Conduxit in Vasc. in exercitu dicta Charta allocata fuit per Curiam and there see his opinion grounded on it that if a man be Indicted of Felony and found Guilty and being in Prison the King may under the Great Seal reciting the Offence c. retain him to serve in his Wars on this side or beyond the Seas this Charter he may Plead and the Court ought to allow it I believe you will be of Opinion that any one who will desire any more Presidents for the Commanding the services of dead men ought to be sent for one to the REHEARSAL viz. that of Arise you dead Men and get ye about your business A. Well Sir As for this objected Dead-man requiescat in Pace I have done with him and since from some things you have said I gather that the dispensing with disability by Roman Emperors and Popes of Rome did never by any ferment disturb their Governments and moreover since no men of sense here have ever troubled themselves or the Government with any vexatious Question about the King's Power in discharging a man from a Praemunire but not from a Penal disability incurr'd whereas by a Praemunire as my Lord Coke shews us Inst. 3. c. 54. men are put out of the Protection of the King and DISABLED to have any Action or Remedy by the King's Law or the Kings Writs and exposed to many other dreadful Punishments I do now begin to wonder whence it is that the mistake in some mens Minds hath come about a Penal disability being so unremoveable And thus I think too one might wonder how such as will allow the King's Pardon to discharge one from an Excommunicatio minor or major do look on disability as such an anathematizing thing as is not to be touch'd or that cannot be