Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	king_n	parliament_n	sovereign_a	5,223	5	9.3738	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A35639	The Case of Saint Edmunds-bury heard at the Committee of Elections the 8th of December, 1680.		1680 (1680)	Wing C980A; ESTC R35916	1,848	1

THE CASE OF Saint EDMUNDS-BURY HEARD AT The Committee of Elections The 8th of December 1680. KING JAMES by Charter in the Fourth Year of his Reign incorporated the Inhabitants of St. Edmunds-Bury by the name of Alderman and Burgesses and thereby erected an Alderman 12 Capital Burgesses and 24 Burgesses of Common Councel for the Government of that Corporation And by Charter in the 12th year of his Reign Ganted that there should be two Burgesses sent to Parliament for the said Borough to be Elected by the Alderman 12 Capital Burgesses and 24 Burgesses of Common Councel Sir Thomas Hervey and Mr. Jermyn Elected by the Alderman 12 Capital Burgesses and 24 Burgesses of Common Councel according to the Charter 12 Jac. Mr. Rotheram Elected by some of the Freemen onely and not the general Inhabitants endeavoured to make out a Right in Bury to send Burgesses to Parliament by Prescription Mr. Rotheram urged that Bury was a Borough by Prescription and offered a Record whereby H. 1. granted to the Burgesses of Bury several Priviledges That Grant of H. 1. is not Extant but by the Exemplification thereof which was 6 H. 4. it appears that that Grant was not made to the Burgesses of St. Edmund but to the Abbot and Convent of St. Edmund Mr. Rotheram to prove Bury sent Burgesses to Parliament by Prescription offered 4 Records 30 Ed. 1. 34 Ed. 1. 14 Ed. 3. and 21 Ed. 3. They were onely the general Writs of Summons to Parliment indorsed by the Sheriffs as sometimes the use in those days was with a Prec ' est in nature of a Remembrance to whom and to what places he made his Precpts The Writs produced by Mr. Rotheram are some of them indorsed Omnibus Ballivis Norf ' c. Norf ' both Hundreds Hertesmere Blyton Norwich Yarmouth Lynn Suff ' both Hundreds St. Edmund St. Etheldred Hundreds Ipswich Donwick Orford From this Mr. Rotheram would infer that Precepts were sent to the Borough of St. Edmund which they were not but to the Bailiff of the Liberty of St. Edmund which was 7 Hundreds and a third part of the County and in the Schedule to the Writ of the 30 Ed. 1. the Sheriff so expresses it in these words Feci praeceptum hujus brevis Senescallo Libertatis Sancti Edmundi c. The Writs offered by Mr. Rotheram have all their Schedules annexed to them except onely that of 14 Ed. 3. which is lost off and do express what places in Norfolk and Suffolk sent Burgesses in those times and who were sent and who their Manucaptors But Bury is not named in any of them that it would have appeared in the very Records produced by Mr. Rotheram had he brought them intire That in those times Bury sent no Burgesses to Parliament Mr. Rotheram would have Precepts to chuse an Evidence of Right though no Records of any Burgesses ever elected and cited North-Allerton and Heydon both in Yorshire as having but one Precept and no Return till lately and yet send Burgesses Allerton sent Burgesses to Parliament Anno 26 Ed. 1. namely Stephen Maunsell and John le Clerke and their Manucaptors John le Norris and others Heydon a late Borough and sends Burgesses to Parliament by a late Charter had no Precept in ancient time But there was a Precept to Hodon a Liberty 50 Ed. 3. which may be the Error If the Precepts had gone to the Town of Bury as they did not yet no Evidence of a Right there being no Election For Basingstoake had 4 Precepts viz. 33 Ed. 1. 28 Ed. 1. 2 Ed. 2. 4 Ed. 2. Aulton had 3 Precepts 33 Ed. 1. 2 Ed. 2. 4 Ed. 2. Odiham 2 Precepts 28 Ed. 1. 2 Ed. 2. Dunstable 1 Precept 4 Ed. 2. Glastonbury 1 Precept 12 Ed. 3. besides Hertesmere Blyton and St. Etheldred in the very Records produced by Mr. Rotheram and yet none of these Places send Burgesses to Parliament or pretend thereunto Mr. Rotheram urged that the men of Bury were bound to the Abbot not to claim a Community and so lost their Right of sending Burgesses to Parliament The Abbot could not make the Town renounce that Right The King and People both had an Interest in it That were for the Abbot to exeute a Jurisdiction over the Sovereign Power Mr. Rotheram urged that the Clause in the Charter 12 Jac. limiting the number of Electors was void For that the King might then create 300 Corporations sending Burgesses to Parliament and that one of His naming should chuse them so in effect there would be 600 of the King 's naming And the King might make as many Lords as he pleased and the Consequences thereof would be plain This Power hath been agreed to the King in all Ages in Originals Grants as that of Bury is as appeares by Coke 4. Inst 49. 2 Co. 121. Hobart 14 15. Rolls 2. part 197 198. and 't would be hard to take it away upon Presumption that the King may use it ill such Proceedings may be dangerous to many Members of the House Bury never sent Burgesses to Parliament till the Charter of 12 Jac. and ever since hath sent Burgesses to Parliament and elected them as that Charter directs and not otherwise The Committee voted and agreed Sir Thomas Hervey and Mr. Jermyn duely elected Answer vide 6 H. 4. p. 1. M. 26. Answ Norfolk and Suffolk then but one Sheriff Note Answ Answ Answ