Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
power_n absolute_a government_n king_n 3,052 5 4.0464 3 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
A56408 An account of Mr. Parkinson's expulsion from the University of Oxford in the late times in vindication of him from the false aspersions cast on him in a late pamphlet entituled, The history of passive obedience. Parkinson, James, 1653-1722. 1689 (1689) Wing P492; ESTC R11774 14,588 20

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

AN ACCOUNT OF Mr. PARKINSON's Expulsion From the UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD In the Late TIMES In Vindication of him from the False Aspersions cast on him in a late Pamphlet Entituled The History of Passive Ob●●●ence LONDON Printed for and are to be sold by Richard Baldwin in the Old-Baily 1689. AN ACCOUNT OF Mr. PARKINSON's Expulsion From the UNIVERSITY of OXFORD In the Late Times ONE might well have expected That Mr. P. who was illegally expell'd the University of Oxford and thereby depriv'd of his Fellowship in Lincoln College in the late Times would upon his restitution to the University have been immediately invited to return to his College Or if 't were too much to expect That yet one might in reason have thought that none of the College would have oppos'd his returning to it especially considering that even those who formerly were his Accusers are now in their Opinions come over to him or at least have acted by those very Principles which they accus'd him of maintaining Now methinks they should in reason do one of these two things Either still reject his Principles or receive Him. For not to admit him when they have admitted his Principles is as much against the Rules of good Logick as 't is when they have granted the Premises to deny the Conclusion The Reverend Dr. Ironside late Vice-Chancellor of Oxford now Lord Bishop of Bristol restor'd him to the University above six Months ago and why the Rector and Fellows of Lincoln College have not yet readmitted him to his Fellowship I believe they can no more tell than Dr. H. can why he expell'd him the University I 'm sure he ought to be readmitted and since the College cannot yet be brought to do him right though I doubt not but in time they will I 'll endeavour to do him what right I can by Printing his Case and telling the World how he was wrong'd Mr. P. was a Master of Arts and Fellow of Lincoln College in Oxford the Fellowship he had there is limited to the County of Oxford so that none but an Oxfordshire Scholar is capable of it And there is this further to be observ'd concerning it That the Bishop of Lincoln for the time being who is Visitor of that College has a peculiar right of nomination to it whenever it is vacant And accordingly he being an Oxfordshire Scholar was nominated to this Fellowship by Bishop Fuller in the Year 1674. and admitted to it by the Rector and Fellows of the College There he liv'd comfortably for nine years and being a Tutor had for some years above twenty young Schloars at a time under his care insomuch that by his Fellowship and advantage of Pupils he had a yearly Income of 120 l. and there it is thought he might have liv'd to this day had he not had so many Pupils 'T was the taking of Pupils that chiefly induc'd him to stay in that College so long the Fellowship alone being hardly sufficient to maintain him there and 't was perhaps the taking of too many that mov'd some of the Fellows to drive him from thence I say some of the Fellows for no more than four out of twelve were his Accusers This probably was his greatest fault a fault which he was never careful to mend nor they willing to forgive But they pretended a more specious cause for their violent Prosecution of him they gave it out That he was a disloyal Man and disaffected to the Government and indeed if to have other notions of the Government than they had were to be disloyal it must be own'd Mr. P. was so for he was willing to think and speak of the Government as the Lawyers taught him who he believ'd best understood it but they were so wise as to correct the Law by their Mistakes in Divinity They thought the King was Absolute he was of another opinion They said The Legislative Power was lodg'd solely in the King he believ'd it was not They were against the Bill of Exclusion he was for it They were for Dr. Hick 's Passive Obedience he was for Mr. Johnson's Now a difference between him and them about such Points as these one may easily guess would cause frequent Disputations and Quarrels and a little ill Nature prompts men to undo those whom they quarrel with provided they have opportunity And Mr. P's Adversaries had as fair an opportunity for undoing of him as their hearts could wish For mark the time when they began to complain of him it was in the Year 1683 at that very time when the Earl of Essex Lord Russel Collonel Sidney and other Gentlemen of Eminent Note were seiz'd on and sens to the Tower for their zeal in opposing Popery and Arbitrary Power it was then when the Nation was in a great ferment when mens Passions were high and made a great noise so that Reason could not be heard This was a lucky time for Informers and of this Mr. P's Adversaries took the advantage Having got so fair an opportunity for oppressing him they first apply'd themselves to the Reverend Dr. Marshall Rector of the College and fill'd his Ears with Complaints against him The Rector who well knew that 't was not any concern for the Government but rather Ill-will and Self-interest which set them against him endeavour'd to check their Heat and bring them to some temper but the more he labour'd to quiet them the more outrageous they grew They knew they had what they call'd the Government on their side and that if the Rector would not receive their Complaints against one whom they had every-where set out as a Whig there were others that would They made grievous Complaints of the Rector himself for refusing to do them justice as they phras'd it and gave it out That he deserv'd to be turn'd out of the College for favouring Mr. P. The Rector hereupon thought fit to appoint a Meeting of the Society about the end of July 1683 for the hearing of their Complaints against Mr. P. and gave him notice of it It fell out unluckily for him that many of the Fellows and those too of best note were then absent from the College as is usual in the Long Vacation who had they been there it is likely would have advis'd his Adversaries to let the matter fall and to forbear prosecuting one of their Fellow-members A Meeting then there was of the Society at the time appointed and Mr. P's Adversaries having drawn up their Charge against him were pleas'd to read it to him He perceiving that some things laid to his Charge were not material had they been true that some were very false and that others wanted only a fair Interpretation to make them pass desir'd a Copy of their Accusation and promis'd within a day or two to give them his Answer to it in writing The Rector likewise requested the same in his behalf but neither of them could prevail The Rector perceiving that he could not gain any thing of them that
grounded at first as I believe it now plainly appears to your Lordship that it was not For your Lordship's nomination of another to succeed me in my Fellowship was grounded upon Dr. H 's Expulsion of me and a supposed vacancy arising from thence and therefore your Lordship's nomination of another could be no more just than Dr. H 's Expulsion of me was nor could give another any more right to my Place than the Expulsion took from me And I desire no easier Thik than to prove that the Expulsion was unjust and being such could not deprive me of the just Right I had to my Place in Lincoln College for no man shall lose a just Right by the unjust Act of another and if it could not deprive me of my Right to my Fellowship in Lincoln College then still I have a right to it notwithstanding Dr. H 's Expulsion of me and he who is at present in it can have no right to it notwithstanding your Lordship's Nomination And therefore I appeal to your Lordship as Visitor of Lincoln College and beseech your Lordship to do me right I leave it to your Lordship's Wisdom to take what method your Lordship shall think fit for the relieving of me and if your Lordship thinks nothing less than a Visitation will no I humbly desire your Lordship to proceed to a Visitation I cannot say that these two Papers of Mr. P. did operate nothing on my Lord Bishop for his Lordship declar'd himself to be clearly of opinion That Mr. P. had hard measure that he had been very unjustly treated and that Dr. H. and those of the College who had done him wrong ought to make him satisfaction Yet this I must say That though his Lordship receiv'd his Appeal yet for what Reasons I cannot tell he has not yet thought fit to judge between the College and Him. It must be own'd by me that the Rector and Fellows of Lincoln College have made some Objections against Mr. P's restitution to his Fellowship and it can't be deny'd by them but every one of their Objections has had an Answer from him though in my judgment some of them needed not any They may print their Objections if they list and his Answers too if they believe them such as will serve to ser●●ff their Objections with advantage but I have no room for Objections and Answers in this Paper However to give the Reader a taste of their Objections I will mention one of them and 't is their great Objection in the Opinion of the Visitor that is 't is their greatest they have The great Objection says his Lordship in a Letter directed to a Gentleman in London that they have against Mr. P 's Restitution is That he neither had nor ever asked leave to be absent from College which is Expulsion by their Statutes And then his Lordship says how he had answer'd it To this I told the Rector in a Letter That Mr. P. was expell'd from the University and not to come within five miles of it and therefore could not come to the College to ask leave to be absent One would think that an expelled man should rather have asked leave to stay in the College than have begg'd leave to go away Sure they were very hard put to it for Objections against Mr. P's Restitution when such as these were sent from Oxford to Buckden Thus have I given a short and true Account of Mr. P's Case my next Task is to vindicate him from the false Aspersions that a late Author has cast on him in his History of Passive Obedience This Author was pleas'd to say in his Preface That he only did the Office of an Historian but I 'm sure he has done it very ill in this particular that concerns Mr. P. however he has done it in others which I do not intend to examine The Office of an Historian I always thought had been to relate and not to invent but this Author has given too great a liberty to his Invention there being not one jot of truth in his whole Story of Mr. P. I can't but observe that he ushers in his false Tale of Mr. P. with another that is also false and concerns a whole Convocation of Doctors and Masters as well as him for speaking of the Decree of the University of Oxford past in their Convocation July the 21st 1683. he says That it-was subscrib'd by the Vice-Chancellor other Professors and the whole Convocation What the Vice-Chancellor and other Professors did I cannot tell but I 'm sure so far is it from being true that it was subscrib'd by the whole Convocation that it was never so much as offer'd to the whole Convocation for their subscription But the Case was plainly this The D. of Glocester as this Author says and who else or whether any else I know not drew up a Decree in which several Propositions were condemned as false seditious and impious and several Bocks quoted in which it was said the Propositions condemned were contain'd but none of the Convocation besides the Person or Persons concern'd in drawing up the Decree had any time given to examine the truth either of the Propositions or of the Quotations But the Paper drawn up was read in the Convocation house and 't was immediately put to the Vote whether it should pass or no the Zealous Men cry'd out Placet and others thought not fit to make opposition and so out they came from the Convocation and presently a fire being kindled in the Court of the Schools the naughty Books were burnt by the hand of the Marshall And now having abus'd a Convocation of Doctors and Masters he singles out Mr. P. and falls foul upon him And pursuant to this Decree Parkinson a Fellow of Lincoln College for maintaining That the right and foundation of all Power was in the People That Kings are accountable for their Male-administrati●n c. And particularly That King Charles the First was justly put to dea●h for making war upon his Subjects was Ann. 1684. expell'd the University In the first place He is mistaken as to the time of Mr. P's Expulsion which is not seemly in one that pretends to do the Office of an Historian for he was not expell'd in 1684. as this Author says but in 1683. But this Mistake I easily forgive because I belleve it was against his will and will only desire the Reader from hence to observe how little this Historian understood ●'s Case and how unfit he was to represent it But he is guilty of a far worse Mistake in assigning the Cause of the Expulsion and this I doubt was a wil●ul Mistake and therefore justly deserves blame He mentions Three Propositions 1. That the right and foundation of all Power is in the Poeple 2. That Kings are accountable for their Male-administration c. 3. And particularly That King Charles the First c. And says that P. was expelled the University for maintaining of these Three with an