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	power_n	royal_a	3,927	5	7.8394	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A37238	Jus imponendi vectigana, or, The learning touching customs, tonnage, poundage, and impositions on merchandizes, asserted as well from the rules of the common and civil law, as of generall reason and policy of state / by Sir John Davis ...	Davies, John, Sir, 1569-1626.	1659 (1659)	Wing D403; ESTC R36082	63,305	189

people we find in 6 Edw. 3 Rot. Parliament numb. 4. 13 Ed. 3. Rot. Parliament numb. 5. 18 Edw. 3. Rot. Parliament numb.10.26.in Arch. Turris In 28 Edw. 3. Rot. Parliament numb. 26. The Commons complain of an excessive Imposition upon Wooll-fells and desire that the old Custome might he paid The Kings Answer is the old Custome ought not to be withdrawn In 38 Edw. 3. Rot. Parliament numb. 26. The Commons desire that an Imposition of three shillings and four pence upon every Sack of Wooll at Callis and all unreasonable Impositions bee repealed The Kings answer unto this is It pleaseth the King that all unreasonable Impositions be repealed like unto this is that answer which is contained in the Parliament Rolls of 6 Edw. 3. numb. 4. in Arch. Turris When Petition was made for remittall of Impositions I shall saith the King assesse no such Tallages in time to come but in manner as it hath been in time of mine Ancestors and ought to be by reason Can any wit of man pick any Arguments out of these Answers against the right of the Crown in setting Impositiout upon Merchandizes Lastly in 13 Edw. 3. Rot. Parliament numb. 13. the Commons pray that the Maletolts of Wooll may be taken as it was used in former times being then enhaunsed without the Assent of the Commons To this Petition there is no answer found of Record the King is silent and gives no answer at all which doubtless the King had not refused to do if the Petition had been exhibited in point of right and not in point of favour Thirdly touching the punishing of the persons before mentioned for procuring of new Impositions to be set upon Merchandizes we are to consider two circumstances first the time when and next the causes wherefore these persons were called in question The time when these persons were called to account was a Parliament holden in 50 Edw. 3. the last year of that Kings Reign at which time that great and renowned Prince who had been formerly assisted by a most wise and politique Councell was become weak and stupid and almost in despair through sicknesse age melancholy conceipted upon the death of his eldest Son the Black Prince and suffered himself to be ●ll-governed by a Woman called Alice Perrey and her Favourite the Lord Latimer upon which occasion and advantage the Commons grew more bold than they were wont to be in former Parliaments and therefore if ought had been done in that Parliament which might prejudice the Kings Prerogative it is ●ot to be urged as an example or presi●ent in these times but in truth the ●auses for which these persons were cen●ured do rather approve the right of the Crown in laying Impositions than any way disaffirm the same First Richard ●ions a Farmer of the Customes was accused in this Parliament by the Commons that he had set and procured to be set upon Wooll and other Merchandizes certain new Impositions without assent of Parliament converting the same to his own use without controule the High Treasurer not being acquainted therewith the said Richard assuming to himself in divers things as a King 50 Edw. 3. Rot. Parliament numb. 17 18 19 20. This was his Accusation and though his answer were that he set those Impositions by the Kings Commandment yet did he shew no Warrant for it and therefore was justly punished with fine ransome disfranchisment and imprisonment But how may this insolency and misdemeanour of a Subject be an argument against the right or Prerogative of the King Lions a Merchant of his own head cannot set Impositions upon Merchandizes Ergo King Edw. 3. a Monarch of his royall Authority cannot do it what an absurd argument were this as if a man should say it were High Treason in a Subject to Coyn money Ergo the King himself cannot do it or cause it to bee done besides the accusation it self doth imply that the King hath power to impose upon Merchandizes because Lions is charged being a Subject to take upon him as a King in divers things namely in setting of Impositiōs as if they should have said a King may do it but not a Subject according to the rules of the Imperial Law Solus Princeps instituit vectigalia Regni tantum juris muneris est indicere vectialia imponere vectigalia maximi Imperii est inferior a Principe non potest imponere and the like And the Bill exhibited by the Commons in this Parliament 50 Edw. 3. Rot. Parliament 191. praying that those that should set new Impositions by their own Authority encroaching unto themselves Royal Power might have Judgement of life and member seemeth to be grounded upon good reason and doth prove it is a Mark of Soveraignty and Royall Power to set Impositions and therefore if a Subject of his own head of his own authority wil presume to do it he is worthy to dye for it and yet this Bill did receive but a general answer viz. Let the Common Law run as it hath been used heretofore Touching the Lord Latimers censure he had not only upon his own head and authority set sundry Impositions upon Merchandizes at Callis where the Staple there was much decayed but he was charged with sundry other misdemeanors mentioned in the said Roll namely that he brought in divers Tallies and Tickets whereby the King was indebted unto his Souldiers and Pensioners for which he gave little or nothing to the parties and yet had an entire allowance in the Exchequer to the great damage of the King and scandall of the Court that he had also deceived the King of the pay and wages which he had sent unto his Souldiers in Britain that he had sold a great quantity of the Kings provisions for his Army there and converted the same to his own use and that he had delivered up the Town of Saint Saviours in Normandy and the Town and Fort of Betherell in Britainy not without suspition of Corruption and Treason How can the Lord Latimers censure for these deceits and misdemeanors make an argument against the right of the Crown in laying Impositions upon Merchandizes And the like may be said of the punishment of Iohn Peachy who having got a Patent that none should sell sweet Wines within the City of London but himself his Deputies and Assignes by colour thereof did extort three shillings and four pence out of every Pipe or Vessell of sweet Wine sold by others within the City Shall this extortion committed by a Subject by colour of a Patent where perhaps the Patent doth not warrant it be objected as an argument that the King himself might not lay the like Imsition upon every Pipe or Vessel by vertue of his Prerogative therefore the punishment of these persons was not the cause that for an 150. yeares after that no Impositions were layd upon Merchandizes by Prerogative but the Princes who succeeded Edw. 3. untill Queen Mary did