Selected quad for the lemma: state_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A26178
|
Reflections upon a treasonable opinion, industriously promoted, against signing the National association and the entring into it prov'd to be the duty of all subjects of this kingdom.
|
Atwood, William, d. 1705?
|
1696
(1696)
|
Wing A4179; ESTC R16726
|
61,345
|
70
|
REFLECTIONS UPON A Treasonable Opinion Industriously promoted Against SIGNING the National Association AND The Entring into it prov'd to be the Duty of all the Subjects of this KINGDOM Hoc quidem perspicuum est eos ad imperandum deligi solitos quorum de justitiâ magna esset opinio multitudinis adjuncto verò ut iidem etiam prudentes haberentur nihil erat quod homines his auctoribus non posse consequi se arbitrarentur Civ de of lib. 2. LONDON Printed and Sold by E. Whitlock near Stationers-Hall 1696. To His Excellency CHARLES Duke of SHREWSBURY one of the Lords Justices of England and one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State c. May it please your Excellency SINCE among the many subjects of just Praise which make up Excellency's distinction it is not the least that the true Religion and Loyalty are known to have been chosen with a Judgment properly your own my ambition could not carry me to a fitter Patron for Truths which are to encounter a strong Pre-possession in Men taught to object novelty against this Revolution tho' with as little cause of triumph as the Papists have for their question where was the Protestant Church before Luther As your Excellency's wise and vigorous discharge of Offices of the highest Trust and Consequence under our only rightful Sovereign King WILLIAM revives to France the noted Terrors in the name of Talbot permit me from thence to take an Omen of Success against Arguments supported by the French Interest and Power more than by any colour of reason Yet they who oppose the Right of the present Government having pretended to seeming Authorities I have used that method which I hope may be proper for their conviction giving a short view of what upon the various Exigencies of the Publick in all Ages of this Monarchy has been the uniform Judgment and regular Practice of Conventions of the States and Parliaments of this Kingdom in concurrence with several glorious Preservers of the English Liberties But that I may use an Authority sufficient in it self to justifie our present Settlement I beg leave to appeal to Excellency's early and eminent Example which will weigh more with Persons acquainted with so illustrious a Character than any Argument from pass'd Times And yet what I here offer being for the most part the Result of the Collective Wisdom of the Nation may not be wholly undeserving of your Excellency's Patrondge nor can I apprehend that you will refuse these Fundamental Truths the benefit of being recommended to the World under so Great a Name which tho' it will set my faults in the clearer light if your Excellency shall be thought to bear with 'em cannot but moderate the Censures against Your Excellency's most devoted humble Servant W. Atwood REFLECTIONS UPON A Treasonable Opinion c. THE Enemies of the Peace of these Realms having handed about a Paper as the Opinion of a certain florid Gentleman of the long Robe eminent for making New Treasons and whose Authority is said to have prevailed with several to refuse Signing the Associatlon for the defence of His Majesty's Sacred Person and Rightful Authority I shall offer what I conceive a sufficient Antidote to the Poyson he would spread with all his affected softness The words of the Opinion as they have occurr'd to me are these By the Statute of Hen. 7. the Subjects are Indemnified in taking an Oath or Fighting for a King de Facto But the Association is not within the Statute but an Overt Act of Treason against the King de Jure and Punishable as such when he shall be restored In refuteing the pernicious Errors contained in this Opinion I shall evince First That according to the best Authorities of them who suppose that there may be a King de Jure as distinguished from a King in Fact the Right of the supposed King de Jure is not such as makes any Act against him to be Treason nor is he King or has any Right against the King in Possession or his Issue Secondly That an Association for the Defence of the King's Person and Right is within the purview of the Stat. 11 H. 7. and that as plainly as an Oath of Allegianee Thirdly That it is not supposed or implyed in that Act that there was or might be a King de Jure while an other was King in Fact but that according to that Act the King for the time being is the onely Rightful King Fourthly That the Statute 11 H. 7. is not introductory of any new Law in this matter Fifthly That his Present Majesty is the only King de Jure and that the late King neither is nor of Right ought to be King Sixthly That according to this Gentleman 's own Law he is Guilty of High-Treason against our Sovereign Lord the King 1. The Lord Coke upon the Statute of Treason 25 E. 3. referring in the Margin to the Statute 11 H. 7. says This is to be understood of a King in Possession of the Crown and Kingdom For if there be a King Regnant in Possession altho' he be Rex de Facto and not de Jure yet he is Seignior le Roy within the purview of this Statute and the other who hath the Right and is out of Possession is not within this Act. Sir Mathew Hale says what in substance agrees with the Lord Coke A King says he speaking of the Statute 25 E. 3. de Facto and not de Jure is a King withing that Act and Treason against him is punishable tho' the right Heir get the Crown Indeed both those Great Men seem to suppose or admit that there might be one who had or at some time or other might have a sort of Right notwithstanding another's being so fully King that a Conspiracy to Kill or Depose him would be Treason But it is to be consider'd 1. That the Lord Coke does not suppose that there may be a King de Jure while another is King in Fact unless this supposition is warranted by the Statute 11 H. 7. which as I shall prove it is not 2. The Statute which in both their Judgments regards only the King Regnant makes it Treason to Conspire the Death of the King 's Eldest Son or to violate his Eldest Daughter for the last of which the Lord Coke assigns this Reason That for default of Issue Male she only is Inheritable to the Crown So that the supposed King de Jure appears to be barred not only by the Possession of the King in Fact but even by that Right which is Vested in his Son or Daughter before either of them have Possession And indeed That Right which ordinarily would descend to the Eldest Son of the King Regnant is truly explanatory of all that will be found to have belonged to one who since E. 4. of the elder branch of the Royal Stock got Possession has often been call'd King de Jure tho' as will appear in
a Settlement made in the Ancestor's life time it will not be so where there has been none as was the case of C. 2. 3. If one should in the eye of Law be King immediately upon the death of an other it would not follow that this would be by a strict right of descent but that after the being admitted King there should be a relation backwards to prevent the loss of any rights belonging to the Crown and thus it was plainly taken by the Chief Justices Dyer and Anderson who say that the King who is Heir or Successor may write and begin his Reign the same day that his Progenitor or Predecessor died And agreeably to this it was the resolution of all the Judges of the King's Bench in Elizabeth's time that a saving to a King and his Heirs shall go to a Successor of the Crown tho' not Heir to that King That J. 2. made too great haste to succeed his Brother C. 2. now at least Men will be apt to believe of whom I shall observe only in short 1. That he was within no Parliamentary Settlement of the Crown then in force 2. The best pretence J. 2. had of coming to the Crown without an immediate election must have been the Settlement 1º H. 7. But no shadow of reason can be assigned why the late Act of Settlement was not as rightful and with as true Authority as that 1º H. 7. 3. J. 2. being reconciled to the Sea of Rome which is High Treason by our Law and for which he had been convicted in his Brother's time if the Indictment had not been arbitrarily defeated was as much disabled from succeeding to the Crown as the Family of George Duke of Clarence by reason of that Duke's attainder 4. Admit the assuming the Royal Dignity had purged the former disability the continuing a Papist was a constant incapacity to be the Head of this Protestant Church and Kingdom rendring it impracticable for him to answer the end for which our Kings had been constituted 5. He was never duely invested with the Royal Dignity not having taken the appointed Coronation-Oath which for his sake was traiterously altered with an omission of the Rights of the People and an unjustifiable Salvo for Prerogative Nor was he ever fully recognized 6. By seizing the Customs and raising Taxes without Authority of Parliament dispensing with the Laws of the Kingdom raising and keeping a standing Army in the time of Peace and the like enormities he violated that constitution which should have made or kept him King and if he ever was King more than Harold the Son of Earl Godwin manifestly ceased to be King before his abdication 7. However it may have been at his first leaving the Kingdom without any other Government than what according to ancient Custom fell upon the States of the Kingdom he having since discovered a settled intention to destroy the People of England or the greater part of 'em by a Foreign Power with their Party here according to those Casuists who are most favourable to such rights as he has claimed from the time at least of his manifesting such intention he ceased to be King and His present Majesty having been regularly declared King the other is totally barred from all claim and colour of pretence How great a noise soever some make for him since his flight after their deseting him the greatest sticklers for his suppos'd rightful Authority being disappointed of their sanguine expectations warmly opposed his exercice of those rights to which their servillity had encouraged him the very Bishops who for his sake have set up for heads under him of a separate Church not only disobeyed his positive commands in matters which at other times at least in things of the like nature they would have contended to belong to his Headship of the Church but they would have limited his Power little less than the 19 Propositions to C. 1. which they had long seem'd to abhor Some of their Party if not themselves joyn'd in solliciting his present Majesty to undertake our Deliverance and a certain Person who would be thought never to have departed from their Principles is said to have gone so far as to sign the invitation tho' upon second thoughts he desired to have his name scratch'd out The Bishops being required to sign an abhorrence of that enterprize absolutely refused it Their Archbishop was one of them who petitioned his present Majesty to take the Government upon him before the late King left England and Non-assistance to their jure Divino King was become as Catholick Doctrine as Non-resistance During this time the designs of the Party were kept secret but the People began to hope well of the Body of the English Clergy believing them by a wonderful providence to be reformed in their Principles of Government with which they had brought a scandal upon the Reformation But the Convention meeting to provide for the Peace and Settlement of the Nation it then appear'd that the mighty Zealots for the Monarchy were only for setting up themselves and in truth would have no Sovereignty but in the Church as they called their Faction for as they would not have his present Majesty to be King but a Regent or Officer for the interim till the late King should come to their terms neither did they truly own him for their King whom they neither would assist as Subjects nor consult in choosing a new Government However the Throne having according to former Presidents and the plain right of the Kingdom been declared vacant upon King's breach of the original contracts and abdication the Lords and Commons reciting many particulars of his misgovernment resolve that William and Mary Prince and Princess of Orange be and be declared King and Queen and make a farther Settlement of the Crown They having accepted the Crown the Lords and Commons together with the Mayor and Citizens of London and others of the Commons of this Realm with full consent publish and proclaim William and Mary Prince and Princess of Orange to be King and Queen of England France and Ireland and in the Proclamation own a miraculous deliverance from Popery and Arbitrary Power and that our preservation is due next under God to the resolution and conduct of His Highness the Prince of Orange whom God hath chosen to be the Glorious Instrument of an inestimable Happiness to us and our Posterity A Parliament called soon after declares and enacts that they do recognize and acknowledge that Their Majesties are and of Right ought to be by the Laws of this Realm their Sovereign Liege Lord and Lady King and Queen of England c. in and to whose Princely Persons the Royal State Crown and Dignity of the said Realms with all Honours Prerogatives c. are fully rightfully and entirely Invested Incorporated United and Annexed Notwithstanding which many who have sworn to bear Faith