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	people_n	regal_a	3,304	5	11.2674	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46343	The judgment and doctrine of the Church of England concerning one special branch of the King's prerogative, viz. in dispencing with the penall laws / asserted by the most reverend father in God, the lords Arch-Bishops Bancroft, Laud and Usher, the right reverend fathers in God, the lords Bishops Sanderson and Cartwright, the reverend doctors, Sir Thomas Ridley L.L.D., Dr. Hevlin, Dr. Barrow, Dr. Sherlock master of the temple, Dr. Hicks, Dr. Nalson and Dr. Puller ; and by the anonymus, author of The harmony of divinity and law : together with the concurring resolutions of our reverend judges, as most consonant and agreeable thereunto ; in a letter from a gentleman of Oxford, to his friend at London.	Gentleman of Oxford.	1687 (1687)	Wing J1172; ESTC R1415	16,661	48

may see what his Opinion is in this matter But before I give you his Words let me beg your favour to hear what the Modest and Holy Writer of his Life Dr Isaac Walton says of that Book from whence I produce them How much the Learned World stands obliged to Him for his Lectures de Conscientia I shall not attempt to declare as being very sensible that the Best Pens must needs fall short in the commendation of them So that I shall only add that they continue unto this day and will do for ever as a Compleat Standard for the Resolution of the most material doubts in Casuistical Divinity And now Sir pray observe what the Bishop says Vpon a Doubt how may that be understood which so commonly is spoken Salus Populi est Suprema Lex the safety of the People is the Supream Law he among other things thus declares There is no sober man will deny that the Safety of the People that is of the whole Commonalty as that word comprehends the King together with the Subjects is the Supream Law but that the Safety of the People that is of the Subjects the King being excluded is the Supream Law there is no man will affirm it unless he be a Fool or an Imposter a Fool if he doth believe what he himself saith and an Imposter if he doth not believe it But if any man will seriously look into the Original of this Aphorism I do believe he will more easily grant that it ought more precisely to be understood of the Safety of the Prince than of the Safety of the Subjects This Saying so tossed up and down in the Mouthes of all Men came to us from the Romans and was then used by them when their Republick did flourish most of all under a Popular State And there is no great Reason that any man should wonder that the People's Safety was the Supream Law with them with whom the People themselves were the Supream Power In the Judgment therefore of those wise Antients who were the first Authors of this Aphorism the Safety of the Supream Power was the Supream Law of the People indeed in a Democracy but of a King in Monarchy But I say it being admitted but not granted that this Aphorism is properly understood of the Safety of the People that is of the Subjects it is nevertheless perversly wrested to the Prejudice of Regal Dignity which even so doth render its Power more Ample and Illustrious in this sence A King that gives Laws and Statutes to his People will not be so bound up by his Laws that it shall not be lawful for him the safety of the Common-wealth being in an apparent danger to provide for the safety of Kingdom and People committed to him by God even against the words of the Law not that it is lawful for Subjects under the pretence of the defence of their Liberty to break all the bonds of Laws and Fidelity and by an intollerable presumption to trample on the Authority of their King but that it is lawful for the Prince in the Preservation of his own and his Subjects Safety to lay aside for a while all strict observance of the Laws and to make use a little of an Arbitrary Right least by too unseasonable and superstitious Reverence of the Laws he may suffer both his own Person and his People that are subject to him and even the Laws themselves to fall into the Power of his Enemies I will close up this Christian Doctrine of our Bishops with one Authority more and that is of our Present Right Reverend Father in God Thomas Lord Bishop of Chester in his Sermon on the 6th of Feb. 1685 6 in the Collegiate Church of Rippon where you will find him thus to inform you and all other good Subjects So that the King may it seems make use of his Prerogative as God does of his Omnipotence upon some extraordinary occasions For as my Lord Hobart well observes The Statute Laws are made to ease him of his Labour not to deprive him of his Power and that he may make a Grant with a Non-obstante to them And indeed the Power of dispensing with particular Laws in some Emergencies is such a Lex Coronae such a Prerogative without which no Kingdom can be well governed but Justice will be turned into Wormwood For there never was yet nor ever will be any human Law framed with such exact Skill and Policy that it might not on some occasion or other be burthensome to the Subject and obstructive to the publick good of the Common-wealth There being particular Cases and Exigencies so infinitely various that 't is impossible for the wit of man to foresee or prevent them And therefore in all Government there must be a Power Paramount to the written Law and we have good reason to bless God that this is lodged but in One and in him whom he hath set over us to be his Vice-gerent by whose Authority they who break the Letter of the Law in pure Zeal and Loyalty to serve the ends of Government and to uphold the Crown on the Right Head that does and ought to wear it may be relieved and pardoned and rewarded too Thus Sir have I given you in short the Sence and Judgment of our Spiritual Guides the Great Fathers of the Church of England in the Point in Question between us I will now discend to men of less degree in the Church but they shall be men of great and eminent Learning sober Understandings and of examplary Piety and Gravity and you shall hear how they All concur in the same Judgment as concerning this Point of Regal Soveraignty The First shall be the Reverend Dr Peter Heylin whose knowledge was extensive as the Earth and who had a parfect familiarity with the present State of all the Countries in the World as the Ingenious Author of his Life informs us and one who is honoured by all true Sons of the Church of England with a due veneration for his Learned and Elabourate Works And He speaks thus He viz. the King hath Authority by his Prerogative Royal to dispence with the Rigor of the Laws and sometimes to pass by a Statute with a Non-obstante The Learned and Judicious Dr Isaac Barrow late Master of Trinity Colledge in Cambridge in his Treatise concerning the Popes Supremacy affirms thus It is indeed a proper Indowment of an absolute Soveraignty immediately and immutably constituted by God with no Terms or Rules limitting it that its will declared in way of Precept Proclamations concerning the Sanction of Laws the Abrogation of them the Dispensation with them should be observed And says he a few Leaves futher The Power of enacting and dispencing with Ecclesiastical Laws touching exteriour Discipline did of old belong to the Emperor And it was reasonable that it should because old Lawss might not conveniently sute with the Present State of things and the publick welfare because new Laws

assume it again to him when and as often as he pleaseth whose Interpretation in that is to be preferred before Theirs For as he saith in another place He is both by the Ordinance of God and Man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Apostle terms him among them that is One who is Supream Soveraign above the Rest and whom they ought in all things to obey so it be not against the Law of God and Common Justice for himself is insteed of the whole Law Yea he is the Law it self and the only INTERPRETER thereof as in whose Breast is the whole Knowledg of the same Now Sir what Answer can you give to all This if it be clear in Divinity that such Authority belongs to the King by the word of God in the Scripture with what Colour of Reason can you deny the King 's Imperial Soveraignty in dispensing with Penal Laws But to proceed more clearly to the Point in Question The most Reverend Renowned and Religious Prelate and Patriot Dr W. Laud Archbishop of Canterbury A man of such Eminent vertue as the Author of his life writes of him Such an Exemplary Piety towards God such an unwearied fidelity to his Gracious Soveraign and of such a Publick Soul towards Church and State that he lived the Honour and dyed a Martyr of both I say this Great but at last unfortunate Prelate thus delivers his Considerate Opinion that the Supream Magistrate in the Estate Civil may not abrogate the Laws made in Parliament though he may dispence with the Sanction or Penalty of the Law quoad hic nunc as the Lawyers speak The next I shall give You is that Learned and moderate Primate and Metropolitan of all Ireland Dr. James Vsher late Lord Arch-bishop of Armagh who in his Book entituled The Power communicated by God to the Prince and the obedience required of the Subject composed purposely for the Rights both of Princes and Subjects and for the comfirmation of staggering Loyalty assures us that POSITIVE LAWS being as other works of men are IMPERFECT and not free from many discommodities if the STRICT OBSERVATION thereof should be pursued in EVERY PARTICULAR it is fit the SUPREAM Governour should not himself only be EXEMPTED from SUBJECTION thereunto but also be so far LORD OVER THEM that where he feeth cause he may ABATE or TOTALLY REMIT the PENALTY incurred by the Breach of them DISPENCE with others for the NOT OBSERVING of them at all yea and generally SUSPEND the EXECUTION of them when by experience he shall find the Inconveniences to be greater then the profit that was expected should redound thereby unto the Common-wealth PLUTARCH setteth this down as a chief point of that natural skill which PHILOPOEMEN had in Government that he did not only rule according to the Laws but over-ruled the Laws themselves when he found it conducing to the weal-publick And he saith a little before by the LAW OF THE KING I understand such ordinances as are MEERLY CIVIL and POSITIVE the COACTIVE POWER whereof being DERIVED from him who is the SUPREAM LAW-GIVER UNDER GOD ON EARTH He himself cannot properly be said to be tyed thereby For as with the Grammarians the Imperative mood hath no first Person so with the Civilians no man can command or forbid himself at least wise no man can impose such a Law upon himself but that he may recede from it when he pleaseth And with the Schoolmen a Law hath power to direct such Acts as belong to those who are subject to the Government of another whereupon no man if we speak properly doth impose a Law upon his own Acts. As no man therefore is superior to himself so no man hath Jurisdiction over himself because none can oblige a man against his will but only his Superiour and the Jurisdiction over a man's self may be dissolved at Pleasure KINGS therefore as he affirms in another place are said to be ABOVE THE LAWS whereby they govern their People partly in respect of Themselves partly in respect of Others Of OTHERS in asmuch as they have POWER to JUDGE according to their own CONSCIENCE and not according to the Letter of the Law as also to DISPENCE in some Cases with the very OBEDIENCE in some with the PUNISHMENT required by the LAW For he quotes Aeneas Silvius a little after saying Equity is that which is just beyond the written Law Now if the Law doth command one thing and Equity perswade another it is fit the Emperor should temper the Rigour of the Law with the Bridle of Equity as He who alone may and ought to look unto that interpretation which lieth interposed between Law and Equity Especially seeing no Decree of the Law although weighed with never so considerate Councel can sufficiently answer the varieties and unthought on plottings of Mans Nature And seeing the Condition of human Law is such that it runneth always without stint and there is nothing in it which can be at a perpetual stand it is manifest that in tract of time the Laws which before were just prove afterwards to be unjust and become now unprofitable now harsh now unrighteous for the moderating whereof there is need of the Prince who is Lord of the LAWS For if it fall out that any thing hath been more obscurely delivered therein it is fit the Emperor should clear it and amend that harshness of the Laws which he shall find to be contrary and disagreeable to his humanity For where it is said that a Law although it be hard should yet be observed that respecteth the inferiour Judges and not the Emperour in whom is that Power of moderating the Laws which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Equity which is so annexed to the Supremacy of the Prince that by no Decrees of man it can be pulled from it Thus far Aeneas Silvius out of him In regard of Themselves Kings are said to be exempted from Subjection to the Laws both because they are not tyed otherwise than for conveniency and good Example's sake to the observance of such as are meer positive and temporary Laws and because they are not liable to the Civil Punishments set down for the breach of any Law as having no superiour upon earth that may exercise any such Power over them And again saith this Great Prelate while the Laws do stand in force it is fit that somtimes the King's Clemency should be mingled with the severity of them especially when by that means the subjects may be freed from much detriment and dammage The Condition of the Magistrates whose Sentence is held corrupt if it be milder than the Laws being one thing the Power of Princes whom it becometh to qualifie the sharpness of them a far different matter To this Eminently Reverend and Judicious Primate I shall next subjoyn the humble patient and learned Dr Robert Sanderson late Lord Bishop of Lincoln that you

with a Non-obstante yet the Queen may grant a Patent with a Non-obstante to cross this Non-obstante I have done Sir now with our Reverend Prelates and Doctors of the Church of England as to this Particular and hope I have sufficiently proved to you that their Judgment and Doctrine doth clearly warrant this Great Prerogative of dispencing with Penal Laws to be in the King. Let us see in the next place what were the Reasons that induced the Reverend Judges in Westminster Hall who the Law sayes are the Expositors of Acts of Parliament and are likewise Custodes jurati ss Praerogativae Regiae so openly and solemnly after mature deliberation to declare their Resolutions in this Point for the King. The Reasons that perswaded them were These that follow viz. I. That the Kings of England are Soveraign Princes II. That the Laws of England are the King's Laws III. That therefore it is an Incident Inseparable Prerogative in the Kings of England as in all other Soveraign Princes to dispence with Penal Laws in particular cases and upon particular necessary Reasons IV. That of these Reasons and these Necessities the King himself is the sole Judge And then which is Consequent upon all V. That this is not a Trust invested in or granted to the King by the People but is the antient Remain of the Soveraign Power and Prerogative of the Kings of England which never yet was taken from them nor can be Now Sir if such hath been the Doctrine of our most Eminent Clergy of the Church of England and in it they have delivered to us nothing but the words of Truth in Righteousness that the King by his Imperial Soveraignty when he shall see the Necessity of the State to require it of which he is the only Judge may dispence with Penal Laws How can you or any man who is a sincere lover of the Church of England be dissatisfied with the Resolution of our Reverend Judges in this matter seeing the Reasons they went upon were only such as were exactly correspondent with the avowed Doctrines before recited and that by this Declaration of theirs the Law of the Kingdom of England concerning this soveraign Power in the Crown is no more than what was before publickly asserted to be the Divinity of the Kingdom Besides Lex vigilat pro Rege saith the Law and the Judges are sworn to maintain all the Kings Prerogatives which are part of the Law of England and comprehended within the same therefore it is said that Imperij Majestas est Tutelae Salus the Dignity of the Prince is the Peoples Security The Kings Prerogative and Priviledges are incident to his Crown and He need not prescribe in any Prerogative for it is as ancient as his Crown is and is not only the Law of the Exchequer but the Law of the Land as that which is his by the ancient Laws of the Land. Wherefore the Judges of the Courts of Westminster are to judge in matters of Prerogative by this Rule that whatsoever may be for the Benefit and Profit of the King shall be taken most largely for him whatever may be against him and for his disprofit shall be taken strictly and it is the Duty of every Judge of all Courts High and Low to take great care to preserve the Kings Right and for that purpose to take every thing at the best for him And Sir unto the Judges the People are bound lastly and finally to submit themselves for matter of Law according to the opinion of the Learned Author of the Royallists Defence But I remember likewise you seemed to startle at the thoughts of this Power and were afraid if at any time the King should think it necessary and convenient to exert it and to grant a general Liberty of Conscience that the Church of England would be extreamly shaken in her security What strange Jealousies and Suspitions some weak men may have I suppose it will not be here worth while to consider but certainly our Great Supporters of the Ark of God can never allow themselves in so feminine a passion They know they have an infinitely wise God and a most Gracious King to trust to this hath been their Doctrine and ought we not to practice it They say 1. They have the Care and Providence of God for their Security who is King of Kings Lord of Lords and the only Ruler of Princes and that the Hearts of Kings are in his Rule and Governance and He doth dispose and turn them as seemeth best to his godly Wisdom according to what Solomon said and perhaps upon his own experience That the Kings Heart is in the hand of the Lord as the Rivers of Water he turneth it whithersoever he will. SO THAT THEY HAVE ALL THE SECURITY THAT ANY PEOPLE IN THE WORLD EVER HAD HAVE OR OUGHT TO HAVE Besides 2. They have a most Gracious King to trust to For 1. They have his Royal Word that he will protect and maintain the Church of England in the free exercise of her Religion as by Law established and can she ever be trusted in safer Hands than his He hath done more than ever any of us durst ever venture to look for to give us Confidence in him enough to puzzle our Understandings as well as our Gratitude And how can he give us better security than he has done Shall we suspect him without cause or remain dissatisfied when he hath given us the best security that our Cause admits of To suspect our Prince where we cannot help our selves is of all fears the most unreasonable 2. Again We have the Conscience of the Prince for our security who hath all the moral Obligations and the fear of God to keep him from oppressing us so long as we keep our selves within the Conscience of the Duty which we owe unto him The Common Principles of Humanity Justice and Equity are engraven by the Finger of God upon the Minds of Kings as well as upon other Mens and they cannot do wrong upon any particular Person much less to great numbers of their Subjects without undergoing the same uneasie remorse that other men do when they injure one another This hath been found by sad experience in Pagan Princes And if Conscience be a restraining Principle in Heathen Princes if they cannot without such Soul torments pervert Justice and violate their Oathes and the Laws it must needs much more be a powerful Principle of Restraint to Christian Kings who are taught to know that they are Gods Ministers and that he will call them to a severe Account for oppressing his People over whom he set them And shall not the fear of God's Anger and Judgments keep the Soveraign from injuring of them 3. But further still As the Church of England hath the Prince's Conscience for her Security so she hath his honour too For Princes like other men are tender of their Honour and good Name and

THE JUDGMENT and DOCTRINE Of the Clergy of the Church of England CONCERNING One special Branch of the King's Prerogative Viz. In dispencing with the Penall Laws Asserted by The most Reverend Fathers in God The Lords Arch-Bishops Bancroft Laud and Vsher The Right Reverend Fathers in God The Lords Bishops Sanderson and Cartwright The Reverend Doctors Sir Thomas Ridley L. L. D. Dr Heylin Dr Barrow Dr Sherlock Master of the Temple Dr Hicks Dr Nalson and Dr Puller And by the ANONYMVS Author of the Harmony of Divinity and Law. Together with the Concurring Resolutions of our Reverend Judges as most Consonant and Agreeable thereunto In a Letter from a Gentleman of Oxford to his Friend at London Licenced the 2d of May 1687. Upon whomsoever God is understood to bestow the Soveraign Authority he must also be understood to bestow upon him all the Jura Majestatis or Essential Rights of Soveraignty according to that Maxim Qui dat esse dat omnia pertinentia ad esse He that gives the Essence gives also the Properties belonging to the Essence Jovian or an Answer to Julian the Apostate chap. 11. London Printed for J. H. and T. S. and are to be had at most Book-sellers in London and Westminster SIR IN one of the late Conferences you were pleased to have with me you seemed to be somewhat disatisfied upon the subject we were discoursing of which was whither the King had by Law such a Supream Power inherent in and inseparably annexed to his Crown as to Dispence with Penal Laws I remember I then told you we could not resolve our selves of this Great Point but by these two wayes 1. To see how far the Judgment of our Church-men appearing in their Doctrines which are for our Edification doth Warrant this Prerogative to be in the King. II. To see how far the Judges Resolutions in declaring their sence of the Law of the Land in this doubtful Question do agree with such their Judgments and Doctrines And as for the First Sir I doubt not but to make it clear past all peradventure that our Reverend Clergy of the Church of England have unanimously concurred in this Point of Doctrine that it doth inseparably belong to the Kingly office to dispence with Penal Laws when ever such a Supremacy of Power shall be thought necessary to be exerted for the safety of the King and the Good and Ease of his People in general And if I can prove this undeniably to You I hope then that this nice Scruple of yours which by the way I suppose you will allow me to call your tender Conscience will easily be removed and consequently then it may be presumed I shall have less difficulty to Satisfie You in the other Point that this sence of the Law of the Land in the point in Question is no other than what is exactly Correspondent with the Judgment and Doctrine of the Clergy of the Church of England To begin then The Reverend Dean of Worcester in his so deservedly applauded Answer to Julian the Apostate declares that the English Realm is a perfect soveraignty or Empire and that the King of England by the Imperial Laws of it is a Compleat Imperial and Independant Soveraign And he quotes Coke in Cawdrye's Case who saith that by the antient Laws of this Realm England is an absolute Empire and Monarchy and that the King is furnished with plenary and Entire Power Prerogative and Jurisdiction and is supream Governour over all persons within this Realm Now it would be a contradiction to call this an Imperial Crown to acknowledge the King for supream over all Persons and that he is furnished with Plenary and entire Power unless He have all Those Rights which are involved in the very Notion of his Imperial Soveraignty By the Rights of Soveraign saith He I understand Those Prerogatives and Preeminences of Power and Greatness which are involved in the Formal Conception of Soveraignty and are inseparably annexed to the Soveraign He hath no sharers or Co-partners in the Soveraignty None Co-ordinate with him in Government no Equal nor Superiour but only God to whom Alone He is subject All Power and Jurisdiction Spiritual and Temporal is derived and deducted from Him as supream Head of These Churches and Realms There are some Essential Rights of the Crown which the Subjects cannot obtain from their Soveraign by any Grant or prescription without destroying the essential and individual Rights of Monarchy These Rights called the Flowers of the Crown are Regalia Suprema or Summa Jura Imperij regno tuendo servientia inherent to his Royal Function and politick Capacity and serve for the strength and support thereof such are the Rights of making War and Peace of having the last Appeal unto him or his Great Council and supream Court and of making Leagues and of Dispensing with Penal Laws granting pardons and such like Now if the King hath a perfection and fulness of Imperial Power in him as Dr Hicks hath clearly made out and This Power of dispensing with Penal Laws be as it must be or nothing one of those Prerogatives and Pre-eminencies of power and Greatness which are involved in the Formal Conception of Soveraignty Then certainly it is very plain that This is an Essential Right inseparably annexed to our Imperial Soveraign and to go about to deprive him of such an inherent Right it would tend to the disinherison of the King and his Crown This Phrase he saith of the disinherison of the King and the Crown in other Acts of Parliament is called The Destruction of the King's Soveraignty his Crown his Regality and things that tend thereunto things that are openly against the King's Crown in Derogation of this Regality And Sir to convince You that the King hath this Perfection and fulness of Power more especially in matters of Religion in his sacred Person you may please to be informed that that Great Metropolitan of All England Arch-bishop Bancroft when Question was made of what matters the Ecclesiastical judges have cognisance either upon the exposition of the Statutes concerning Tythes or any other thing Ecclesiastical or upon the Statute 1 Eliz. concerning the High Commission or in any other case in which there is not express Authority in Law declared That the King himself may decide it in his Royal Person and that the Judges are but the Delegates of the King and that the King may take what causes he shall please to determine from the Determination of the Judges and may determine them himself And the Archbishop said that this was clear in Divinity that such Authority belongs to the King by the word of God in the Scripture So that Eminent Prelate For as it is well observed by that Learned Knight and Doctor in the Civil Law Sir Thomas Ridley His Majesty by communicating his Authority to the Judges to expound his Laws doth not thereby abdicate the same from himself but that he may

might conduce to the good of Church and State the care of which is incombent on him because the Prince is bound to use his Power and Authority to promote Gods Service the best way of doing which may be by framing Orders conducible thereunto And in another place he declares that it is a Priviledge of Soveraigns to grant Priviledges Exemptions Dispensations Thus sayes the Reverend Dr Sherlock Master of the Temple in a positive manner it does not become any man who can think three Consequences off to talk of the Authority of Laws in derogation to that Authority of the Soveraign Power The Soveraign Power made the Laws and can repeal them and dispence with them and make new Laws the only Power and Authority of the Laws is in the Power which can make and execute Laws Soveraign Power is inseperable from the Person of a Soveraign Prince I shall in the next place give you the words of the Ingenious and most painful Searcher into Truths John Nalson Dr. of Laws whose indefatigable Industry hath sufficiently appeared in those Volumes of Historical Collections he lived to see published to the World his words are These In the Kings Power it is to remit the Severities of the Penal Laws whereby he may manifest his Goodness and Clemency as well as his Greatness and Justice by graciously pardoning the Smaller Breaches of his Laws and the more Capital Offences which he might most justly punnish And who in the World can dispute this When as Dr. Hick's in his Jovian tells us for certain that upon whomsoever God is understood to bestow the Soveraign Authority he must also be understood to bestow upon him all the Jura Majestatis or essential Rights of Soveraignty according to that Maxime Qui dat esse dat et omnia pertinentia ad esse He that gives the Essence gives also the Properties belonging to the Essence And doth not all mankind consent in this that the King is the fountain of mercy as well as of Justice Surely then the Penal Laws especially those made meerly for diversity of Opinions in Religion which not to call them unchristian since our Saviour never offered any external force and Compulsion to make men obey his Laws as the Learned master of the Temple assures us but however are in themselves by experience proved very unreasonable ought at least to be Subject to the Goodness and Mercy of the Prince to dispence with them when He in his Wisdom shall judge it most necessary for the Good of his People in generall For as the Aegyptian Hieroglyphick for Government was an Eye in a Scepter So the chief Magistrate is like a watchman upon a Tower who is to look down and view the general state of his People and to conduct himself accordingly The Reverend Dr Puller in his most extraordinary Book concerning the Moderation os the Church of England saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moderation as it is now generally used is a word borrowed from the Law and is used by the Masters thereof to denote such a gentle and benign temper as disposeth those who have the Administration of the Laws which You see is the Imperial Soveraign who hath the Supream Jurisdiction over all others and Jurisdiction is defined by the Civilians to be Potestatem Juris dicendi a Power of giving Laws to others to remit of their Rigour where either first they press too hard upon particular persons or else secondly to supply the defects of the said Laws where they provide not sufficiently for particular cases in order thereunto squaring their Determination by the natural rules of Justice and goodness rather than by the Letter of the Law. And a little further the same Doctor goes on saying moderation in the Forensick sence wherein we take it is defined by Aristotle to be the Correction of the Laws wherein because of their Vniversality they are deficient From whence as it must be supposed to be confined to those to whom the Administration of the Laws is committed who Alone can have the Power of correcting them So nothing therefore will be further requisite to shew than that it disposeth them where the Laws press too hard upon particular persons to relax the Rigour of them as on the other side where they do not sufficiently provide for them to supply their defect All Laws we know are for the punishment of Evil Doers or for the praise of them that do well but it being impossible so to provide for the punishment of evil doers as not sometimes to bring even the Innocent within the compass of it because what generally considered ought to be lookt upon and censured as evil may yet upon sundry considerations and circumstances have nothing of evil in it or at least be worthy of pardon either the Innocent must suffer together with the nocent which so benign a vertue as that we treat of cannot allow or it must dispose those to whom the Administration of the Laws is committed to remit of their rigour in such particulars and exempt them from the undergoing of it it being in like manner impossible for Laws so to provide for the incouragement of those who deserve well as that sometime such may not be past over or neglected partly because all cases cannot be foreseen by the Law-giver and partly by reason of the shortness of his expressions either some who may deserve incouragement may be excluded from partaking of it which so benign a vertue as we speak of cannot casily permit or it must dispose those to whom the Administration of the Laws is committed to ampliate their favours and to take such within the compass of them Once again Equity and moderation saith He in the next page is the publick honesty of the Laws without which Justice often would be turned into Wormwood it contains the excellent Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mind and reason of the Law and is the most Sacred and venerable part of it As it is the honour and perfection of the Laws so it is the Sanctuary of such as happen to be oppressed by the Rigour of the Letter I will now Sir trouble you with but one instance more upon this Subject though I could multiply I am confident Authorities of this kind even beyond your patience and that is of One that will needs be Anonymus and therefore so he shall pass for me but his words are These It is the Prerogative of the King to dispence with many Acts of Parliament by a * Non-obstante or clause of notwithstanding especially such as bind him from any Prerogative that is solely and inseparably annexed to his Sacred Person and Royal Power And even to the Asterick * There is this marginal Note viz. 44. Eliz. in the house of Commons Sir George Moor said We know the Power of her Majesty cannot be restrained by any Act. Why therefore should we thus talk admit we should make the statute