Selected quad for the lemma: prince_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
prince_n	elder_a	son_n	wales_n	4,760	5	10.4096	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26170	The history and reasons of the dependency of Ireland upon the imperial crown of the kingdom of England rectifying Mr. Molineux's state of The case of Ireland's being bound by acts of Parliament in England.	Atwood, William, d. 1705?	1698 (1698)	Wing A4172; ESTC R35293	90,551	225

Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction which the Statute in England placed in the See of Canterbury are become English Archbishops And with the like way of reasoning he would infer that Acts of Recognition in England are of no Force in Ireland till the Irish have recognized the same King and yet confesses That whoever is King of England is ipso facto King of Ireland and the Subjects are obliged to obey him as their Leige Lord That they in Ireland are so annexed to England that the Kings and Queens of England are by undoubted Right ipso facto Kings and Queens of Ireland To use Mr. M's own Expression I am sure there 's an end of all Speech if he does not confess that a Prince rightfully possest of the English Throne is thereby King of Ireland before any Recognition made by a Parliament there and yet not withstanding this generous Concession he immediately subjoins And from hence we may reasonably conclude that if any Acts of Parliament made in England should be of force in Ireland before they are receiv'd there in Parliament they should be more especially such Acts as relate to the Succession and Settlement of the Crown and Recognition of the King's Title thereto and the Power and Jurisdiction of the King And yet we find in the Irish Statutes 28 H. 8. c. 2. An Act for the Succession of the King and Queen Ann. And another c. 5. declaring the King to be supreme Head of the Church of Ireland Both which Acts had formerly pass'd in the Parliament of England So likewise we find amongst the Irish Statutes Acts of Recognition of the King's Title to Ireland in the Reigns of H. 8. Queen Elizabeth King Charles 2. K. William and Q. Mary by which it appears that Ireland tho annexed to the Crown of England has always been look'd upon to be a Kingdom compleat within it self and to have all Jurisdiction to an absolute Kingdom belonging and subordinate to no Legislative Authority on Earth Tho 't is to be noted those English Acts relating to the Succession and Recognition of the King's Title do particularly name Ireland Before I enter into the enquiry how this can be made consistent with a Kingship ipso facto before the Recognition in Ireland 't will be requisite to inform him that we have had Settlements of the Crown by Acts of Parliament here which never were formally received by any Parliament in Ireland and yet such Act of Parliament here has ever been held to bind Ireland tho 't was not expresly named and that tho the Settlement has carried the Crown from the elder Branch of the Royal Family for instance 7 H. 4. at the request of the Lords and Commons in Parliament 't was enacted That the Inheritance of the Crown and of the Realms of England and France and of all other the King's Seigniories or Lordships beyond Sea with the appurtenances be put and remain in the Person of the said King and the Heirs of his Body issuing and 't was ordain'd established pronounced expressed and declared that Prince Henry the King 's eldest Son be Heir apparent to succeed him in the said Crown Realms and Seigniories to have them with all their Appurtenances after the King's decease to the Prince and the Heirs of his Body with Remainders over to the King 's 2 d and 3 d Sons and the Heirs of their respective Bodies successively And according to this Form 1 H. 7. 't was ordain'd established and enacted by Authority of Parliament that the Inheritances of the Crowns of the Realms of England and France with all the preheminence and dignity Royal to the same appertaining and all other Seigniories belonging to the King beyond Sea with the Appurtenances in any manner due to them or appertaining do stand and remain in the most noble Person of their said Sovereign Lord H. 7. and the Heirs of his Body lawfully issuing for ever with the Grace of God to endure and in no other Persons Not to trouble Mr. M. with an enquiry whether these or any other Acts of Parliament in England of former Reigns united Ireland to England otherwise than as they declared their intention for that Seigniory or Dominion to go along with the Government of England or what Act of Parliament in Ireland since the first submission to H. 2. created an Annexation of the Land of Ireland to the Crown of England I must entreat him to explain How it should come to pass that the King of England ipso facto by his being made King here is King of Ireland and yet that those Acts of Parliament here by which the King is declared King without and against a strict courst of descent are of no force till the King is recognized by Act of Parliament in Ireland If a King of England as such is ipso facto King of Ireland is he not so before any Act of Recognition there And if so what can that or other Acts repeating the Laws made in England signify more than a full publication of what was the Law before If the Election or Declaration of a King by a Parliament in England gives a Law in this matter to Ireland and such a King is to be obey'd by virtue of that Law ipso facto before he is received and acknowledged by a Parliament in Ireland do their subsequent Recognitions in the least infer that Ireland is a compleat Kingdom Is it any better than a Contradiction to hold that a King of England as created or declared in a Parliament of England is thereby or at the same instant King of Ireland and yet that Ireland is a Kingdom so compleat in it self that he is no King till the Act of Parliament creating or declaring him King is confirm'd by a Parliament in Ireland Or take it the other way No Act of Parliament in England is of any force till confirmed in Ireland and yet a King declared by a Parliament of England tho he was not King before such declaration is thereby or ipso facto King of Ireland that is an Act of Parliament of England is not of force in Ireland till confirm'd there and yet 't is of force ipso facto by the being enacted here Does it not therefore follow that such an annexation of Ireland to the Crown of England as makes the King of England ipso facto King of Ireland destroys the supposition that their Parliaments have Authority to confirm or reject Laws made by the Legislature in England Or otherwise that the supposition of such an Authority in the Parliament of Ireland destroys that annexation which Mr. M. himself yields Further yet 't will appear that even after a Parliament of Ireland had as far as it could annex'd that Land as a Kingdom to the Imperial Crown of England an Annexation here was requisite for the ratifying what had been done in Ireland Therefore 34 and 35 H. 8. an Act was made by the Parliament of England for

ask him what sort of Law he takes the above-cited Statutes of Ireland to be and shall afterwards shew that they have all along submitted to such a Conquest or Acquisition as gives a Right to the imposing of Laws 3. But since he is pleas'd to say As Scotland tho the King's Subjects claims an exemption from all Laws but what they assent to in Parliament so we think this our Right also and going upon the supposition of Ireland being a Kingdom as distinct from England as Scotland he frames an Objection that however they may be restrain'd by War from doing what may be to the prejudice of England the stronger Nation If this may be he asks why does it not operate in the same manner between England and Scotland and consequently in like manner draw after it England's binding Scotland by their Laws at Westminster As to Scotland not here to enter into the Dispute between the Lord Coke and the rest of the Judges who resolv'd Calvin's Case and the House of Commons of that time nor yet into the Question concerning the Scotch Homage whether 't was for the Kingdom of Scotland or only for some Lands which their Kings held of the Crown of England 'T is enough to observe that during the Heptarchy here we often had one King who was Rex primus to whom the others were Homagers and obedient in the Wars for common Defence of the Island yet each King had his distinct Regalities and the Countrys their several Laws and Customs and distinct Legislatures for Lands and other Rights and Things within themselves This 't was easy to conceive that Scotland had and thus both there and here under the Heptarchy the several Kingdoms notwithstanding Homage to one King who had the Primacy were under separate Allegiances as the respective Subjects were not bound to the same Laws tho the States of the Kingdom did Homage as well as the King When the Right to the Crown of Scotland came afterwards in J. 1. to be in the same Person who had the Crown of England and that without any new Acquisition by the Crown or Kingdom of England there was no merger of the less Crown and 't is certain that in the Judgment of Law Palatinates fallen to the Crown continue distinct Royalties But if for the keeping a Kingdom distinct whether in the Person of the same King or as an Appendant to his Imperial Crown a distinct Legislature is necessary as well as a distinct Jurisdiction then Wales which in many of our Statutes is call'd a Dominion was no distinct Dominion or Principality if it at any time continued in the Crown without having Parliaments of their own or being represented here by Members of their own chusing but thus it was with Wales from the 12 th of E. 1. to the 34 th of H. 8. in right of E. 1 st's Conquest as Sir John Davis or the Judges in his time call the Acquisition of that Dominion and as 't is there E. 1. changed their Laws and Customs as he had express'd in his Charter or the Statute of Rutland which follows Divinâ providentiâ terram Walliae cum incolis suis prius nobis jure feodali subjectam in proprietatis nostrae dominium totaliter cum integritate convertit coronae regni nostrae annexit By the Divine Providence the Land of Wales with its Inhabitants before subject to us by feudal Right we have turn'd wholly and entirely into the Dominion of our Propriety and annexed it to the Crown of our Kingdom And as to their Laws and Customs Quasdam de consilio procerum regni nostri delevimus quasdam permisimus quasdam correximus ac etiam quasdam alias adjiciendas faciendas decrevimus Some by the Counsel of the Peers of our Kingdom we have abrogated some we have permitted some we have corrected and besides some others we have added and decreed to be put in execution Here is a Title understood at that time of taking a Forfeiture for Rebellion against the Lord of the Fee and in consequence of this the King and his Peers in Parliaments took upon them to exercise a Legislative Power over Wales But notwithstanding that Wales was thus united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of England and absolutely subjected to its Legislature yet as is held in Davis's Reports this Principality of Wales not being govern'd by the common Law was a Dominion by it self and had its proper Laws and Customs That Report shews Wales by reason of these different Laws and Customs to be more distinct and separate from the Kingdom of England than Ireland is and that a Tenure of the Prince of Wales should not after its reduction under the Subjection of England become a Tenure of the Crown in chief but that it should be so in relation to Tenures of a County Palatine in Ireland as well as England because such a County in either Land was originally a parcel of the Realm and derived from the Crown and was always govern'd by the Law of England and the Lands there were held by Services and Tenures of which the common Law takes notice altho the Lords have a separate Jurisdiction and Seigniory separate from the Crown But that Tenure in Chief in Ireland as well as England could be no other than of the Crown of England appears not only by the Grants to the Electors Palatine or Lords Marchers of Ireland but in that Ireland was not raised into a Kingdom till H. 8's time The mention of Palatinates may well occasion a Comparison between the Land of Ireland and the County Palatine of Chester a distinct Royalty in the Principality of Wales that had its Parliaments within it self as 't is very probable from before the time of W. 1. it being certain that Hugh Lupus enjoyed that Earldom by Judgment of the Lords if not the Great Council in the time of W. 1. and their Parliaments may be traced from within the time of H. 3. downwards to their first having Representatives in Parliaments of the Kingdom 34 H. 8. Their provincial Parliaments were chiefly if not only for the granting Aids to the Crown but notwithstanding their being represented in Parliaments at home yet Laws were made here in the superior Parliament for the governing the Inhabitants of the County of Chester Now without considering whether Cheshire was a Colony from England or from Wales or mix'd or else a place exempt without regard to the being any Colony I may well hold that tho from before the time of W. 1. they had the privilege of being tax'd only by themselves or with their own Consent yet their Parliament was subordinate to the Great Council of the Kingdom of England and 't was no violation of the Right of their Parliament for the National Council to give them Laws for their better Government and to restrain 'em from acting to the prejudice of the Crown and