Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	john_n	sir_n	william_n	220,632	5	9.5376	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A75451	Answers for Sir John Hall lord provost of Edinburgh, the magistrats, town council, and others. To the complaint exhibited by James McKlurg, George Clerk, Robert Blackwood, VVilliam Paton, and others, against them.		1694 (1694)	Wing A3465; ESTC R234722	12,007	10

ANSWERS For Sir John Hall Lord Provost of Edinburgh the Magistrats Town Council and others To The Complaint exhibited by James Mcklurg George Clerk Robert Blackwood VVilliam Paton and others against them THe Sum of the long Libel is this that the Defenders are factious persons designing to perpetuat the Office of Provostrie of Edinburgh in the Persons of Sir John Hall and Sir Archibald Muir by turns and to inhance and squander the Common-good of the Town and that the said Sir John and George Stirling by their imprudent Carriage in Parliament towards the Royal Interest occasioned a great Branch of the Towns Revenue to be cut off by an Act of Parliament And that for these Designs of perpetuating that Magistracy and inhancing the Common-good to themselves they have made many Invasions on the Set and Constitutions of the Town by the three last Elections which the Complainers crave may be reduced upon several pretended Violations of the Set and the Defenders otherways punished therefore and in order thereto the Complainers crave that the Books and Registers of the Town Council may be produced and which Libel consisting of two Sheets back and before was execute against the Defenders upon Saturday in the afternoon to compear before your Lordships this day For although the Complainers were sufficiently picqued at the disappointment they met with in not being advanced to places within the Town according to their expectation a great while ago which they themselves thought they did deserve though the plurality of the Town Council was of another opinion and consequently the Complainers have had a considerable time to advise and consult this their long Complaint yet they never attempted to raise the same till after the death of Sir James Rochead one of the conjunct Clerks of the Town that Mr. David Dalrymple his Son in Law having agreed with Aeneas Mcleod Sir James his Conjunct to get his Good-will of the half of that Office the Complainers knew that the receiving or not receiving of a Clerk was in the power of the Defenders and that they had grounds to believe that the Defenders would not receive Mr. David in that Office so they would have the settled Magistracy of the Metrapolitan overturned to make way for their own Advancement and the Instalment of Mr. David in the foresaid Office For within an hour after the Execution of the Libel against the Provost Mr. David proposed to him and thereafter to Baillie Chiesly that the Town Council would enter him to his Father in Law 's place which Favour Mr. David would not have demanded from a Magistrate which he thought was presently to fall even though they had granted his desire but would rather have been obliged for that Complement to James Mclurg his Cousin who as the Complainers give out is to suceed the Provost if they prevail As the Factiousness of the Defenders they humbly represent to your Lordships in all sincerity that they are of no Faction neither Jacobite nor Episcopal but are persons well affected to the present Government both of Church and State and that they have no intriguing with such disaffected persons whatever Friendship the Complainers may have from such and whatever Inclinations the Disaffected within this Town may have shown to have the Complainers brought into the Magistracy For as Sir John Hall and George Stirling their Zeal and Affection for Their Majesties Interest did appear in their hearty and chearfull Concurrance in the late happy Revolution as Members of the Convention of Estates representing this good Town so Sir Archibald Muir made his Loyalty and Zeal for this present Government eminently appear by his inducing of the Neighbours of the Town to offer to contribute for the Maintainance of a Regiment for Defence of the present Government when a dreadful and present Invasion was threatned from France and of which Offer your Lordships need not to be remembred As to Sir John Hall and Sir Archibald Muir's design to perpetuat themselves Provosts of Edinburgh by turns though it be the great Drift and Scope of the long Libel and many far fetched Consequences and Repetitions used to evince and make out that Design against the Defenders yet the Sum of all is that Sir John was first Provost and that Sir Archibald succeeded upon his Dimission and that Sir John was elected at Michaelmass last when Sir Archibald went off Yet that Sir John was first legally Elected the Complainers cannot contravert and that Sir Archibald succeeded him cannot infer the Design of perpetuating the Office betwixt them since it is imppossible but that one Man must succeed another beside Sir John had no hand in the Election of Sir Archibald having voted both for Leeting and Electing Archibald Hamilton So that the Design is only inferred from this single Act that Sir John is now Elected after Sir Archibald when James Mclurg's Friends offered to lay Wagers that he would carry the Vote But it is a strange Confidence to infer from one single Act a Design of perpetuating the Office by turns when the Complainers themselves cannot deny but that Sir John was absent all the time that the last Election was in Agitation and that he was very unwilling to accept of the Office after he was voted Provost and which Office he only accepted for the Common good and not for his private Interest since the Complainers dare not say that he made or makes any Advantage by the place nor could Sir John gratifie his Ambition thereby having had the Honour before of being chosen Provost by the popular Election in a critical time and continued a second year by the ordinar way of Election As to the Design of inhancing and squandering the Towns Money it is no ways evinced by any Fact or Deed done by the Defenders in inhancing or squandering already any part of the Towns Goods nor in any such thing alledged to be done by the Libel but only the Hundreth Pounds Sterling given to William Menzies which shall get a good Answer in its proper place And as for the inhancing of the Towns Money the Complainers have not the Confidence to alledge the Defenders have already done it or to give any Instance thereof but they would have them removed because they may Inhance the same hereafter which if it be a good Argument all Magistrates may be removed because they may Inhance But to redargue the Complainers Jealousies of Inhancing they know that at the Michaelmass 1683. the Town was but in six hundreth thousand Merks of Debt which by the Mismanagment of the Magistrates in five or six years extended it to seven hundred and sixty _____ thousand pounds when Sir John Hall entered to be Provost for the former Magistrats were in use to Borrow Money for payment yearly of their Annualrents and expend yearly of incident Charges _____ thousand pounds or thereby whereas since the Revolution there has no Money been Borrowed for payment of Annualrents but on the contrary some Principal Sums have