Selected quad for the lemma: nation_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nation_n	english_a	king_n	scot_n	1,287	5	9.2947	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85742	A reply, to a namelesse pamphlet, intituled, An answer to a speech without doors, &c. Or, a defence of Master Chaloner's speech. Wherein the question is rightly stated, the interest of the kingdome and Parliament vindicated, and all moderate men answered. / By G.G. a lover of his countrey. Published according to order.	G. G.	1646 (1646)	Wing G21; Thomason E362_26; ESTC R201222	5,015	8

A REPLY TO A Namelesse PAMPHLET Intituled An Answer to a Speech without doors c. OR A DEFENCE OF Master CHALONER'S Speech WHEREIN The Question is rightly stated The Interest of the Kingdome and Parliament vindicated And all moderate men answered By G. G a lover of his Countrey Veritas Index sui obliqui Published according to Order LONDON Printed for R. Leybourn 1646. A Reply to a namelesse Pamphlet intituled an Answer To a Speech without Doores c. I Had thought M. Chaloners speech should not sooner have been published then received the joy of our Nation for so knowing a man of it his gallant sayings did not tend to the advance of himself but his Countrey not to destroy the King as some will have it but to let him know hee was Prince of a People that know their priviledges and his just authority which they would not have questioned by servants and hirelings but preserved by Freemen and Masters but the bad people of our Nation that had rather be slaves to strangers then live in necessary subjection under the Government of their Countrymen must stretch their little proportion of wit to a defence of the Scorishmens interest in the disposition of the English affairs For allow them a right in the disposall of the King in England and that of the Kingdom must needs follow but the undertaker of this must be such anone whose expressions of himselfe in Greek may perswade a man of the excellency of the English intended to put a Blur on this Worthy of Israel But to leave this prefacing as he terms it I shall discover the weaknesse of this Malignant imagined confutation And first God not permitting him in this to lye he admires Master Chaloner comming forth as a Goliah and being unable to meet him in the field of Truth which M. Chaloner had stated in few lines making the Scotchmans much appear little which are wheresoever the King of Scotland hath an interest in their King they may dispose of him But the Kingdom of Scotland hath an interest in their King hee being in England therefore in England they may dispose of him But he will have it altered from the Truth and sayth thus it ought to be Whatsoever is by Covenant Treaty and the very Law of Nations of joynt interest and common concernment to both Kingdoms ought not to be disposed of but by mutuall advise of both Kingdoms for the good of both But the person of the King whether in England or Scotland is by Covenant Treaty and the very law of Nations of joynt interest and common concernment to both Kingdoms Therefore the person of the King whether in England or Scotland ought not be be disposed of but by the mutuall advise of both Kingdoms for the good of both I confesse for a principle for him to ground his argument on thus It ought to be But whereas he urges Covenant Treaty and the Law of Nations to be the ground the Scots work upon to prove their interest in the disposing of the person of the King he being in England if it were as well proved as it is by him urged it might appear rationall but not true enough for rationall Englishmen to believe it For as no president can be brought to prove the King of England was ever in his Kingdom of England disposed of by the greatest forreigne Prince I hope wee are not grown so effeminate to let him be disposed of or we subjected by one of the meanest people Page 3 he sayth the Scotch Papers do state the question not upon the authority power and office of the King but upon the person of the King When a question is put to have judgement given on it if it be not right put it cannot be rightly judged And the case between us and the Scots is not how it is put but how it ought to be He hath an ill tongue that cannot tell a good tale for himself the Scots make the person of the King the only thing of dispute but wee are by Covenant oblieged to mayntayn as well the Law of the Land as the person of the King therefore they leaving that out hath made the case imperfect But imagine the person of the King to be the only thing now in dispute yet hath the Parliament of England the sole disposing of it in England The case is thus both the Kingdomes have voted the Kings person ought to be disposed of and therefore it ought to be so beyond dispute so that now the question is whether the Parliament of England shall dispose of him in England or the Scots and Parliament Now as it is a great prejudice to the honour of the English Nation to have any other people to dispose of their King in their own Country singly or joyntly so it ought to be looked into whether they have a right to do it if they have a right it must be by custome or an Act of Parliament And if they can shew neither President nor Law God forbid that the Parliament that sitteth to make us free and preserve the priviledge of the English Nation should consent to this that will so much destroy it Page 3 he also sayth That the honour person and just priviledges of the King ought by Covenant to be mayntained wherefore they being joyned in it they are bound to mayntain it We will allow that they ought and when they finde that the Parliament doth take away the just priviledges or wrong his person then let them endevour to defend it and if the Parliament cannot justifie their actions by their priviledges they will be blameable Page 4 he sayth the paper sayth Persona sequitur locum and his person must be disposed of by the supreme power of that Countrey wheresoever he shall hap to abide By which principle sayth he the person of the King of England if he were in Scotland must be disposed of by the supream power of that Countrey And was not this well pleaded for the interest of the Parliament of England There is nothing can be sayd to justifie the just spirit of M. Chaloner more then this noble expression for as hee would have no inchroachment on the priviledge of the English Nation by the Scots so he is equally just in defending the priviledges of the Scots against the English He sayth in Page 9 of M. Chalenors Speech he reades that what person soever commeth into the Kingdom of England hee is forthwith a subject of England for being protected by the Laws hee becomes subject to the Laws On which hee concludeth that when an Embassadour comming from an other Countrey into England can receive no protection in England and further inferres that the honour of the Parliament and Kingdome are blemished by this with forreigners As the Laws of all Nations are made positive to all people residing under the protection of them without exception of Embassadours yet the condition of Embassadours is so welcome to a Kingdom or Common