when Pope Innocent the Third had against the declar'd will of King John caused Stephen Langton to be Elected Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and after that confirm'd him and wrote to the King to receive him the King returns that he the Pope had subverted the Liberties of his Crown and that therefore he would prohibit all People going to Rome and from making appeals thither which confirms my former instance and that this Power was always in the King however for a time it might have happen'd to be neglected for otherwise it had been a vain thing in him to have expell'd the Monks of Canterbury as Traytors which he actually did or to have imagin'd that a Bigotted Seditious Clergy as at that time they were and to be headed by that Arch-Bishop at least no friend to the King if not his Enemy should be frighten'd with an empty Bug bear touching a matter whereof he had no cognisance had he not been satisfi'd it was in his Power to do it as well as his Father before him had done it And having thus occasionally nam'd him let me with all submission offer this to the memory of that unfortunate Prince that his designs in order to the freeing the Crown from Forein usurpation were mighty and that he came short in what Henry the Eighth afterwards effected was not that he was less able but his times worse for considering the unsettled condition of those times and at what disadvantages he came in what wonder if he were oppress'd by a Faction when deserted by his Subjects who otherwise had never suffer'd him to have made that Crown to the defence of which they had all sworn tributary which many years afterward when the Arrears of that Tribute were demanded was too late tho effectually enough declar'd in Parliament he could not do nor they consent to the doing it But to proceed When after this the Sea of Rome would be yet intermedling it was by all the States of Parliament severally examin'd and answering each State one by one personally for it self unanimously Declar'd That the Pope's awarding any Processes or Sentences of Excommunication c. against any Bishops or other Spiritual Persons for executing Judgments given in the Kings Courts was clearly in derogation of the Kings Crown and Regality used and approved of the time of all his Progenitors and which they would maintain as they were bound by their Liegance and thereupon Enacted That the purchasing any Bulls from Rome or elsewhere shall be a Premunire In which it is observable That as the Judges before that time were for the most part Church-men the Laity being not yet come up to Letters or where they were Rari nantes in gurgite vasto The Lords Temporal and the Commons of this Parliament were all Romanists and of what Persuasion the Lords Spiritual and their Assistants the then Judges were I leave to every man the question at that time being not matter of Religion but right of Superiority not the Church but Court of Rome And so Sir E. Cooke speaking of the first Article of the Statute of 25 H. 8. concerning the Prohibition of Appeals to Rome saith it is but declaratory of the ancient Law of this Realm And in another place The same Authority that the Pope ever exercised in this Kingdom by Usurpation was always in the King de jure With which also agrees the Lord Chief Justice Hobart That whatsoever the Pope did in this Kingdom even then when he was in his greatest height and strength was of no better force in right and justice than at the first when he was but simple Bishop of Rome which was coram non Judice and so Jus non habenti tuto non paretur 5. The Power of conferring Honors on which account he may also enable a man to assign his Surname Arms and Barony to another For as by the Laws of England all Lands within the same were originally derived from the Crown and holden of the King either mediately or immediately as Lord Paramount so also by the same Laws were all degrees of Nobility and Honor derived from the King as the Fountain of Honor. So H. 6. granted to H. Beuchamp Ut esset primus praecipuus Comes Angliae and that he should use the Title of Henricus Praecomes totius Angl c. ibid. 361. First Earl of all England c. And to the name Count or Earl which was the most ancient name of Dignity among the Saxons Edw. 3. Ang. Greg. 11. created the Title of Duke as distinct from that of Earl for in elder times they were oft synonimous with us and created his eldest Son the Black Prince then Earl of Chester into the Title of Duke of Cornwal which he created into a Dutchy and about the 18th of his Reign the most noble Order of the Garter And in the 9th of R. 2. Robert de Vere Earl of Oxford was created Marquess of Dublin And H. 6. the 18th of his Reign created John Lord Beaumont Viscount Beaumont of which Titles we find no mention in the Magna Charta 9. H. 3. for they were not at that time in being And to this yet further the Kings of England have and may at this day create a County-Palatine which none but the Emperor or a Supreme Monarch may do for whoever is owner thereof hath in that County Jura Regalia as fully as the King in Palatio Par curis solo diademate dispar So Hugh Lupus Nephew of King William the Conqueror was by him created Earl of Chester and the County given him Tenendum sibi haeredibus ita libere ad gladium sicut ipse Rex tenebat Angliam ad Coronam by which general words he had Jura Regalia within the said County and consequently a County-Palatine without express words and by force thereof he created eight Cheshire Barons So not long after his time was the County-Palatine of Durham raised And in the 10th of H. 1. the Royal Franchise of Ely In the 13th of Edw. 3. the County-Palatine of Pembroke And in the 50th year of his Reign the County of Lancaster was by him erected into a County-Palatine and by him given to his fourth Son John of Gaunt then Duke of Lancaster for life to which if any one shall say that it was De assensu praelatorum procerum Sir Edw. Coke answers for me That the King may make a County-Palatine by his Letters Patents without Parliament Add to this the three first Counties-Palatine created in Ireland by Henry the Second viz. Leinster which he granted to Earl Strongbow who had married the Daughter and Heir of M. Morough Prince of Leinster 2. Meath to Sir Hugh Lacy the Elder 3. Ulster to Sir Hugh Lacy the younger and had their Barons under them answerable to the Barons created by H. Lupus of which before Of which you may read excellent Learning
A DISCOURSE OF Monarchy More particularly of the IMPERIAL CROWNS OF England Scotland and Ireland According to the Ancient Common and Statute-Laws of the same With a Close from the whole As it relates to the Succession of his ROYAL HIGHNESS JAMES Duke of York DEUT. 4.32 Interroga de diebus antiquis qui fuerunt ante te ex die quo creavit Dominus hominem super terram c. LONDON Printed by M. C. for Jos. Hindmarsh Bookseller to his Royal Highness at the Black Bull in Cornhil 1684. To the most Honorable JAMES Duke of ORMOND c. Lord Lieutenant of Ireland May it please your Grace IT was a saying of the late Earl of Ossory Lord Deputy of Ireland your Son at what time he deliver'd up the Sword of that Kingdom to the Lord Lieutenant Berkeley Action is the life of Government Common experience tells us Usefulness is the end of Action and without which like a Glass-eye to a Body a man rather takes up a room than becomes any way serviceable The sense of this put me on those thoughts I herewith present your Grace and unto whom more fitly than to a Person in the defence of which few men sate longer at Helm or suffer'd more You that hung not up your Shield of Faith in the Temple of Despair and never seem'd more worthy of the great place you now fill than when farthest from it Nor am I in the so doing without some prospect of advantage to my self in as much as if the censuring Age shall handle me roughly on this account under your great Patronage I shall fight in the Shade And now my Lord I was just breaking off when it came into my head that I had in some of our late pieces found Sir Edward Coke often quoted especially to the defence of those Notions which had better slept in their forgotten Embers and therefore I thought it not altogether forein to the matter that I us'd the words of S. Peter 2 Pet. 3.16 touching S. Paul's Epistles In which saith he are some things hard to be understood which they that be unlearned and unstable wrest as also they do the other Scriptures to their own destruction I have purposely made use of him in many places as an high Assertor of Monarchy and Prerogative Those that find him otherwise Habeant secum serventque Or let him lie indifferent my Argument depends not singly on him which I humbly took leave to advert and am May it please your Grace Your most Obedient Obliged humble Servant John Wilson THE CONTENTS Sect. I. THat Monarchy or the Supreme Dominion of one person was primarily intended by God when he created the World That it is founded in nature As consonant to the Divine Government And of Divine Institution Acknowledg'd by Heathens as well as Christians 1 Sect. II. That Adam held it by Divine right Cain a Monarch By the Kingdoms of the most ancient Gentiles not God's but Monarchs were denoted That the origiginal of Power came not from the People by way of Pact or Contract The unreasonableness and ill consequence of the contrary Noah and his Sons Kings A Family an exemplary Monarchy in which the Pater-familias had power of life and death by the right of Primogeniture Examples of the exercise of it in Judah Abraham Jephthah Brutus Vpon the increase of Families they still continued under one head Esau. The four grand Monarchies Ancients and Moderns universally receiv'd it as precedent to all other Governments 12 Sect. III. That all Governments have a natural tendency to Monarchy Their several Forms and Rotations Of Aristocracy Democracy Tyranny to be rather wisht than either Examples of Athens and Rome the first Consulate Their Tribunes several Seditions Marius and Sylla Crassus Caesar Pompey The two latter divide Caesar complemented to Rome by the Senate The Triumvirate their Proscriptions and breach No peace till Monarchy restor'd under Augustus The sense of those times touching this matter 34 Sect. IV. That the Kingdom of the Jews was a Supreme Sovereign Monarchy in which their Kings had the absolute Power of Peace and War and were Supreme in Ecclesiasticis And an Answer to that Objection That God gave them a King in his wrath 62 Sect. V. What is here intended by a Supreme Monarchy The marks of Sovereignty as the Power of making Laws and exemption from any coactive obedience to them The Power of Peace and War c. That the Kingdoms of England c. are Supreme Imperial Monarchies Those two marks of Sovereignty and seven others prov'd to be no other than what has ever been the undoubted Right of the Kings of England The Kings Sovereignty by the Common Law The like from the Statute Law Power in Ecclesiasticks And that they have justly used those Titles of King and Emperor and that from ancient times and before the Conquest 67 Sect. VI. That the King is none of the Three Estates in which two preliminary Objections are examin'd by Reason and answered by the manner of the Three Estates applying to him What the Three Estates are To presume him one of them were to make him but a Co-ordinate Power The King cannot be said to Summon or Supplicate himself How will the Three Estates be made out before the Commons came in With a short Series during the Saxons to the latter end of Henry III. in all which time they are not so much as nam'd as any constituent part of a Parliament And the time when probably they first came in to be as they are at this day one of the three Estates That the Lords Temporal were never doubted but to be an Estate Four reasons offer'd that the Lords Spiritual are one other Estate distinct from the Lords Temporal and one Act of Parliament in point With other Authorities to prove the Assertion 181 Sect. VII Admitting what has been before offer'd wherein has our present King merited less than any of his Royal Ancestors with a short recapitulation of Affairs as they had been and were at his Majesties most happy Restauration and that he wanted not the means of a just Resentment had he design'd any 181 Sect. VIII That notwithstanding the hard Law of the Kingdom the Jews paid their Kings an entire Obedience Two Objections answered The like other Nations to their Kings A third Objection answered The Precept of Obedience is without restriction Examples upon it Nor is Idolatry any ground to resist much less things indifferent The example from our Saviour in Instituting his last Supper Least of all is injury with the practice of Holy men of old in like cases And that if any ground were to be admitted that would never be wanting 189 Sect. IX The Arts of the late times in working the People from this Obedience It was to be done piece-meal The Kings Necessities answered with Complaints Plots discovered Fears and Jealousies promoted Religion cants its part Leading men some to make it Law others Gospel The examples of Corah c.
Elizabeth Most dread Sovereign Lady c. We your most Humble Faithful and Obedient Subjects the Lords c. So to Queen Mary We your Highness most Loving Faithful and Obedient Subjects c. do beseech your most Excellent Majesty that it may be Enacted c. So to H. 8. In their most humble wise shewn to your most Royal Majesty the Lords c. And so to Rich. 3. and backward By the Advice and Assent of the Lords c. at the request of the Commons To Edw. 4. By the Advice and Assent of his Lords Spiritual and Temporal and at the special Request of his Commons To H. 6. By c. and at the special instance and request To H. 5. the same To H. 4. At the instance and special request To R. 2. the same In Edw. 3.'s time These things underwritten at the request of the Commons be Established and Enacted by our Lord the King his Prelates Earls and Barons so by the Assent and Prayer of the Great men and the Commons And in Edw. 1.'s time At the request of the Commonalty by their Petition made before him and his Council in Parliament as may be further seen in the Statutes at large till ye can go no further backward than the King commandeth In which also I have been the larger that by the consent of all times I might shew that this is not after the manner of Corporations or the Language of Equals and shall be my first Argument why the King is none of the Three Estates 2. This will further appear if we shall consider who these Three Estates are And those I take to be the Lords Spiritual viz. Arch-Bishops and Bishops who sit in Parliament by Succession in respect of their Baronies parcel of their Bishopricks 2. The Lords Temporal as Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts Barons who sit there by reason of their Dignities which they hold by Descent or Creation and the third Estate the Commons of the Realm viz. Knights of Shires Citizens of Cities and Burgesses of Burroughs respectively Elected by force of the Kings Writ which three Estates Sir Edw. Coke saith the French-men call Les Estates or L' Assemble des Estates And Philip de Comines speaking how the English grant Subsidies Convocatis saith he primis ordinibus assentiente Populo The first or chief Estates being call'd together and the People assenting And Bodin who by his Conference with the English Embassador for so himself confesseth wherever he speaks of the Constitution of England calls it the King and the Three Estates of the Realm Like which The Republick of the Kingdom of Poland in the Interregnum between the Death of one King and the Election of another is stiled Serenissimae Reipublicae Regni Poloniae c. Congregati Ordines The Estates Assembled And such were the Amplissimi Ordines among the Romans viz. the Senate of whom the Emperor was no part and signifies with us The Estates of People among our selves viz. The Clergy The Nobility and the Commons which being duly Assembled we call a Parliament And so Sir Henry Spelman speaking of the word Parliament saith it is Solenne Colloquium omnium Ordinum Regni authoritate solius Regis ad consulendum statuendumque de negotiis regni indictum A Parliament saith he is a Solemn Conference of all the Estates of the Kingdom commanded together by the sole Authority of the King to Consult and Order the Affairs of the Realm From whence it must necessarily follow that the King is none of them but as the Apostle says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having the preheminence over them for Quicquid efficit tale est magis tale Whatever is the cause of any thing is greater than the thing caused 3. To presume the King to be one of the Three Estates were to make him but a Co-ordinate Power and consequently concludible by the other two for Par in Parem non habet imperium Among Equals there is no Authority whereas the Supreme Title of King is distinguish'd from others in this that it acknowledges no other Superior And Bodin speaking of a Supreme Monarch saith He is next to God of whom he holdeth his Scepter and is bound to no man And to the same purpose Berkly Regum cognata Potentia coelo Whence it naturally follows that this Honor is not to be shar'd with another 4. Which is a negative instance And one Negative instance saith the Lord Bacon is of more force to unfix a pretending Rule than two Affirmative to establish it If the King were one of the Three Estates he should be Summon'd by Writ but because all Writs Issue in his Name it cannot be said that he can Summon himself or Supplicate himself as both Houses do him or not to have Power to depart without leave i. e. of himself seeing they have no Power to Assemble Determin or Depart part without the Kings express Commandment 5. If the King were one of the Three Estates then it follows of course as undeniable that before the Commons became a Third Estate and a Constituent part of a Parliament as they are at this day That the King must have been one Estate The Lords Spiritual a second The Lords Temporal a third or otherwise there could not have been Three Estates and now the Commons since the Writs for their Election being become another what hinders but that they make a fourth unless perhaps we deny the Lords Spiritual to have been one and then before the Commons there could be but two To examin it a little That Great Councils of Kings their Nobles Wise men and Chief Officers were frequently held of Ancient time there is hardly any thing more obvious but whether the Commonalty scarce yet civiliz'd or if so for the most part if not wholly without Literature were any essential or constituent part of those great Councils and Government might be a question at this day if there were any sufficient ground on which to raise it Convocavit David omnes Principes Israel Duces tribuum Praepositos turmarum qui ministrabant Regi Tribunos quoque Centuriones qui Praeerant substantiae Regis filiosque suos cum Eunuchis Potentes robustissimos quosque in exercitu Jerusalem David called together all the Princes of Israel the Leaders of the Tribes and the Captains of the Companies that served under him and the Captains over the thousands and the Captains over the hundreds and the Stewards over all the substance and possession of the King and his Sons with the Officers and mighty men and valiant men unto Jerusalem By which you see of what persons this great Council consisted all men of the first note and not a word of the people In like manner Solomon Congregavit majores natu Israel cunctos Principes tribuum Capita familiarum de filiis Israel in Jerusalem He