Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	wrong_a	wrong_n	year_n	12	3	3.8350	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78518	An answer to the Scotch papers. Delivered in the House of Commons in reply to the votes of both houses of the Parliament of England, concerning the disposall of the Kings person, as it was spoken when the said papers were read in the House. / By Thomas Chaloner Esquire, a Member of the House of Commons.	Chaloner, Thomas, 1595-1661.; Scotland. Parliament.; England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.	1646 (1646)	Wing C1802; Thomason E361_7; ESTC R18165	6,765	18

AN ANSWER TO THE Scotch Papers Delivered In the House of Commons in Reply to the Votes of both Houses of the PARLIAMENT of England Concerning disposall of the Kings Person As it was spoken when the said Papers were read in the House By Thomas Chaloner Esquire A Member of the House of Commons London Printed by Francis Leach 1646. A Speech made in the House of Commons the 26th day of October 1646. upon the Reading of the Scotish Papers the same day In Reply to the Votes of both Houses of Parliament of the 24th of Sept. concerning the disposall of the Kings Person ●poken by Thomas Chaloner Esquier a Member of the said House Mr. SPEARKER YOu have just now heard two Papers Read before you from the Commissioners of Scotland the first concerning the disposall of the Kings Person the other touching the distractions of the North by reason as they say of the now payment of their Army I shall speak nothing to the latter because it hath beene so sufficiently answered by divers knowing Members of this House To the first I shall wholly apply my selfe because little or nothing hath beene said to that point The qu●stion then before you is about the dispose all of the Kings person you say that hee is to be disposed of as both Houses of Parliament shall think fitting but your Brethren of Scotland say hee is to be disposed of as both Kingdomes shall think sitting And they Fortifie their affirmation with these reasons They say that he is not only King of England but also King of Scotland and as you have an interest in him hee being King of England so have they no lesse interest in him hee being KING of Scotland And as they have not the sole interest in him hee being KING of Scotland because they acknowledge with all that hee is King of England so have not you the sole interest in him he being King of England because they ●esire you to remember that he is also King of Scotland so as neither Na●ion having a sole but a joynt Interest in his person they ought joyntly to dispose of it for the weale and benefit of both Kingdomes This I take to bee the whole scope of their Argument wh●ch they have represented unto you under so many disguises and as it were by multiplying glasses Insomuch as the bare relating of it takes up three la●g sheets of paper B●● while they debate this great question with you ●ouching the disposall of the Kings Person and while they possicively ●ffi●me that he is to be disposed of by the j●ynt consent of both Nations Give me leave to remember you th●● in the meane time they dispose wholly of him themselves and so have done for these six months and m●y for six months longer for any thing I can gather out of these Papers Their Argument runs thus Wheresoever the Kingdome of Scotland hath an Interest in there King there they may dispose of him But the Kingdome of Scotland hath an Interest in their King he being in England Therefore in England they may dispose of him Sir This may seeme at the first to some to be a faire and specious Argument but let it be well considered it will prove erronious and Fallacious For in the Major Proposition they understand one thing by the word King and in the minor Proposition they understand another thing by the word King and so here is a conclusion inferred which the premises will not warrant For the cleering whereof I pray Sir remember that this word King is of a various signification sometimes it is taken in abstracte that is for the Roy. all power Function and office of a King sometimes it is taken in Concreto that is for the man or person whom we call King If their Major Proposition be taken in the first sence we shall never deny it them nay wee shall acknowledge that the King of Scotland being taken in abstracte wee have nothing to doe with him at all hee is solely and totally theirs God forbid that a King of Scotland going out of his Kingdome should either make Scotland cease to bee a Kingdome or give any participation of interest to that Countrey where hee doth reside let his person reside in the furthest parts of the earth yet the Royall Office and Capacity of the King resideth still in Scotland they have his sword to doe Iustice by they have his Scepter to shew mercy by they have his Seale to confirme what they please by And they have his Lawes to Governe by And in this sense it is only meant that the King is never under yeares never dyes cannot bee deceived can neither do wrong nor take wrong of any body And in this sense we fight for King and Parliament though the person of the King bee in opposition to both and in this sense the returnes and tests of the Kings Writs are Coram me ipso apud VVestmonasterium and teste me ipso apud VVestmonasterium let the Person of the King at the same time be in France or the remotest Country of the world but a King of Scotland taken in their sense is never out of Scotland and therefore whereas they say in the minour Proposition That the Kingdome of Scotland hath an interest in their King he being in England this must needs be meant of a King in Conereto that is onely of the person of their King and not of his Royall Capacity And in this sence we must deny that they have any thing at all to doe with him For though the Royall Office of the King of Scotland is solely to bee disposed of by the State of Scotland Yet it is not so with his Person For Persona sequitur locam and his person must be disposed of by the supreame power of that Country wheresoever he shall happen to abide Suppose a King of Scotland should bee in Spaine will they say they have as great an interest to dispose of his Person there as in Scotland I thinke they will not say so and yet they did affirme last day at the Conference that they had as good right to dispose of his person at Westminster as they had at Edenburgh But under their favour England is as distinct a Kingdome from Scotland as Spaine It is as distinct in Lawes distinct in Priviledges distinct in interest it is neither subordinate no dependent of Scotland and they can no more dispose of a King of Scotlands person he being in England then if he were in Spaine I shall take this as granted for good Law that let the person of any Nation under the sun which is in amity wich England happen to come i●t● England that person is forthwith a subject of ENGLAND For hee being protected by the Lawes of England hee becomes thereby subject to those Lawes it being most certaine that Protectio trahit subjectionem subjectio protectionem they being relatives the one cannot stand without the other and as no man can be said to