Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	king_n	law_n	person_n	8,134	5	5.4280	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43914	The history of the Association, containing all the debates, in the last House of Commons, at Westminster concerning an association, for the preservation of the king's person, and the security of the Protestant religion : the proceedings about an association in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and a true copy of the Association, produced at the Earl of Shaftsbury's tryal, and said to be found in his lordships study, with some observations on the whole : to which is added by way of postscript reflections on the parallel between the late Association, and the Solemn League and Covenant.	England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.	1682 (1682)	Wing H2144; ESTC R13449	34,008	34

be diffident of us not doubting but that if we can once but lay a foundation for a good Correspondence that His Majesty will take so much content in it beyond what he doth now enjoy that to preserve it he will afterwards grant us what more Bills may be further necessary for the security of the Protestant Religion And therefore I am not for clogging this Address with any request for anything more than that one Bill Sir W. J. Mr. Speaker Sir We have hitherto had so little success in our endeavours that we may justly suspect we are permitted to sit here rather to destroy our selves then to save our Country It is a matter of admiration to me that those who have so often advised His Majesty to put this and the former Parliaments upon finding out Expedients for securing the Protestant Religion without altering the Succession should all this while find out none themselves but still continue advising the King to put that upon us which after many Debates is found to be impossible And that the King should always have at his elbow persons ready to remember him constantly to make his limitation which in all appearance must tend to the final destruction of the Protestant Religion And that there should be no body there to mind him of proposing some Expedients to prevent it only in general words of which no use can be made According to the opinion of Three successive Parliaments the limitation in favour of the Popish Interest is plain intelligible and practicable I hope his Majesty against the next occasion will require them that have so advised him to make the Expedients and other ways to secure the Protestant Religion as plain and practicable that so we may see if the security of the Protestant Religion be designed in good earnest by such advisers which I cannot believe because what they propose is in my opinion a contradiction in it self Without the Exclusion-Bill there can be no Expedient but what will leave us in that miserable condition of having first or last a contest with our lawful King And there can be no such thing as setting up a power to oppose him but by putting a kind of Supream Authority in the Parliament with a power to oppose as well by making War as Laws which might prove the destruction of the Monarchial Government The said trust or power without the Exclusion Bill being not to be reposed in the next Heir or any single person least he should dye before he come to have the power in him or utterly refuse to act if he should live to have a right by vertue of such a settlement to administer the Government In such a case there would be no lawful power lodged any where else to oppose such a King and there must not be an inter Regnum By this short account you may see what difficulties all expedients will be liable too and may conclude that those that advise the King to make this Limitation do intend it as an Expedient to make the endeavours of Parliaments ineffectual and to bring in Popery And if you had offered at such Expedients as I have mentioned as the last House of Commons was Arraigned for Omnipotent and Arbitrary so would this with some worse Character as having attempted to destroy the Monarchical Government that if possible the King and People might be put out of love with Parliaments But Sir though it is plain that things are thus out of order yet let us not be wanting in our duty but give such an Answer to his Majesty as may if possible create in him a good opinion Of his House and satisfie him of the necessity of the Bill of Exclusion and that all other Acts of Grace will but serve to fatten us for the slaughter of our Enemies The last part of this Speech I believe is his Majesties own he seems willing to know what you expect from him and what you will do for him which I think is a fair proposition to come to an understanding And although it be not good manners to offer to make a bargain with his Majesty but as in bargains there is a quid and pro quo so in this And I think we need not fear talking of money in this House being all seem resolved to give it freely if we can be secured of our Religion but not otherways And therefore I humbly conceive you may accordingly express your selves plain in your Address W. G. Mr. Speaker Sir if you do not represent all your Grievances in this Address as the condition of your giving Money whatever you shall offer at afterwards will be looks as clamarous and out of order And therefore I would advise you not to omit any one Grievance you expect any ●e ready in And I am for enumerating all your Grievances in the Address which have been lately Debated And I do admire no body does take notice of the standing Army which if not reduced to such a number as may be convenient for Guards and so limited that they may not be increased unless in case of a Rebellion or an Invasion all your Laws may signifie nothing And I am not satisfied in the making of such general offers of Money For if you do you will hear in time that the Fleet needs one Million Allyances as much more and Tangier though I think not worth keeping little less A demand of Three Millions grounded on your general promise would perplex the House how to come off with that reputation which a House of Commons ought to preserve with the King I know not how such a promise may be turned upon you and therefore I am either for demanding more or promising less Sir E. H. Mr. Speaker Sir I am very unwilling to have this Parliament broken yet I cannot agree that to prevent it we should offer so much and demand so little as hath been mentioned Have we not sat two dayes in a Committee to examine the dangerous estate of the Kingdom and ordered several good Bills to be brought in thereupon for the securing us against Popery and Arbitrary power and shall we now the next day lay all those Bills aside and be content with the Exclusion-Bill onely which I think will be worth nothing unless you can get more And therefore though to obtain them you spoke plain English and mentioned what sum you intend to give I think you will be safer to offer Money in general words without declaring what or enumerating your Bills G. V. Mr. Speaker Sir I cannot agree with this worthy Member for it would take up some days Debates to agree what some is necessary to supply his Majesties occasions and what sum to express And it may be to no purpose as the case stands with us unless we were sure his Majesty would find out some way to bring the Exclusion Bill about again then indeed we might come to particulars In the mean time a promise in general words may be sufficient and save

oppose these great Enemies by some other Laws as when an House is on fire we make use of Buckets and Tubs for casting of water until the great Engines can be got But I would move you to be cautious what you do for I am afraid that the design of putting you upon finding out Expedients is not in order to have any thing done that is effectual against Popery but in order to have you offer at something that may purchase a disrepute on the House and give your Enemies an advantage to persue their designes of breaking us by alleadging that you aim at Laws that will overturn the Government For my part I am fully perswaded that this is the design of those that have put the King so often to declare against altering the Succession and to recommend other wayes and that offer at what you will if it be any thing that is like to prove strong enough to secure us against Popery that you will see the House put off before it come to any perfection and that in time it will be made use of to arraign the Proceeding of Parliament and to perswade the people that this House did attempt to alter the Government by such and such Bills and so by degrees possess the People that Parliaments are either dangerous or inconsistent with the Government that if possible they may be well content to be without them Sir I am afraid that the Popish party are more serious in this design than we are aware of and that next to the great endeavours they have used for many years to keep on our divisions in points of Religion the next great Artifice which they depend on is the infusing into the people the dislikes of Parliaments For they well know that Popery can never be established in this Nation as long as Parliaments are permitted to Sit and Act. Therefore though I know it is below a House of Commons to mind every little discourse yet I think if we conclude that this powerful Party amongst their many designes have this for one that we ought to countermine it as much as we can We cannot well comprehend what a Bill of Association will be before it be drawn up nor what difficulties may be found in the contriving of it and therefore I think no great debate will be necessary about it before such a Bill will be brought in And I believe it will be found more likely to be serviceable in case the Papists be banished and therefore I conceive a Bill for Banishment of all the considerable Bapists out of England may be very nacessary And if at the same time that we endeavour to secure our selves against Poperty we do not also do something to prevent Arbitrary Power it will be too little purpose for the one will be sure to give a hand to bring in the other and I think nothing can prevent that or rather both better than frequent Parliaments And therefore I humbly move you that a Bill for securing frequent Parliaments may be taken into your consideration Sir G. H. Sir I think you are well adviced that the way to secure our selves effectually against Popery is to secure our selves also against Arbitrary Government and that the having of frequent Parliaments is the best way to secure both and therefore Sir I think you do well to move the House that a Committee be appointed to inspect what old Laws there are for enforceing the sitting of frequent Parliaments that if they should be found deficient some new Laws may be made for that purpose I do agree that a Bill for Banishing out of England the most Considerable Papists may do well but I hope Sir that if you banish the Men you will banish some Women too For I do believe that some of that Sex have been great Instruments in bringing about our ruine and if in time you would consider how to prevent the Royal Families marrying Popish Women it would be of great security hereafter For I am of Opinion that the late Queen Mother's Zeal for her Religion was not only a great occasion amongst many others of the miseries that befel us in forty one but the great cause of all our Miseries now by perverting the Duke from his Religion as is reported and may reasonably be believed if we conclude that she had that Motherly care for the salvation of her Children as other Mothers usually have for according to her Opinion it was not to be obtained out of the pale of that Church And no man can doubt but that the Protestant Interest hath been much Prejudiced by his Majesties marrying a Princess of that Religion For we have plainly seen since the discovery of the Plot how some of the most material Jesuites and Popish Instruments have sheltered themselves under her Royal Protection and how they have helpt to carry on the Plot by being so impudent as to pretend they had her patronage and by abusing her Authority but more especially by the Dukes marrying the Princess of Modena because of her near Relation to the Pope and Cardinals All which was plainly foreseen by that Parliament which met a little before that Marriage in 1673. and therefore they made an Address to his Majesty representing the said ill consequences desiring him not to permit it because it would tend to the destrustion of the Protestant Religion But their endeavours were defeated by that Party as we may guess seeing we find so much use of her name in Colemans Letters for well might they who have over-ruled in so many affairs as have been instanced in this House have an influence also in this that so that Party might not want so useful an Instrument in so great a station and so the Parliaments Address miscarried but that they had either a good Judgment or Prophetick Spirit I hope will never miscarry but remain upon Record And unless you do believe that these Ladies are less compassionate than others usually are how can it be otherwise their Principles considered But Sir I will not trouble you farther about it but suppose it may be worth your consideration in due time In the interim I agree for the Bill of Banishment and Association too I. B. Sir I retain a good opinion of an Association-bill notwithstanding what hath been said as to the weakness it may receive from our unhappy Divisions in point of Religion and Interest too much promoted by some of our Clergy For Sir when I consider how the Laudean principles as to raising of Money without Parliaments in the late times infected most of our Clergy so as that they not onely preached up the Kings absolute Authority over mens Properties but branded with the title of Rebels and condemned to Hell those that offered to argue against it I do conclude that it is usual for one or two Bishops to give measures or directions to the rest of the Bishops and they to the Clergy of their several Diocesses And that therefore the Clergy derive the