Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n crown_n king_n realm_n 5,962 5 8.3139 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A25327 The Anatomy of a Jacobite-Tory in a dialogue between Whig and Tory : occasioned by the Act for recognizing King William and Queen Mary. 1690 (1690) Wing A3053; ESTC R22595 20,621 38

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Potestas designativa Person● cannot pretend that here was a Choice or Designation made by their Representatives for the Convention had not taken the Oaths which should qualify them to act as their Representatives W. That is to say you would have them swear to be true and faithful to the late King when they believ'd that he ceas'd to be King and the Contract between him and the People was broken If it were broken then no doubt but they might do all that was necessary for subjecting themselves to King William and Queen Mary without regard to the Obligations enter'd into to the other as he was King of England T. I thought I should draw you into an Ambuscade Last part of the Magistracy c. p. 8. If you urge the Vacancy as the Author of the last part of the Magistracy and Government vindicated has smartly argued you must grant that the Government was dissolv'd every thing reduc'd to its primitive state of Nature all Power resolv'd into Individuals and the Particulars only to provide for themselves by a new Contract W. To use your Friend Dr. Brady's Expression yours is but an aiery Ambuscade suitable to the Judgment of your wordy Author according to whom our Common and Statute-Laws have had many an interruption But the great Civilian Pusendorf would tell him that no Nation can be presum'd so sottish to intend at the first setting up of a King that their Laws should determin with their Prince's Life or Title T. You still talk of the People's Choice when it is contrary to the Maxims of our Law that there should be any instant of time wherein we are without a King W. You mean when the course of Descents goes on but have there never been Interruptions T. Yes but not of right W. But had the Laws no force while they who you suppose to have had the right were out of possession T. That may deserve consideration but I am sure the Right could never be lost for it was first acquired by Conquest and it is not to be presum'd that a Conqueror would have his Right depend upon any Condition W. Not to trouble you with too many things at once I shall put you to prove four things 1. That W. I. was a Conqueror 2. That his Conquest was absolute without any manner of Terms 3. That he gain'd a Right for himself and his Heirs by proximity of Blood 4. That the Rule to judg who was his Heir is not the Law of the Land but something more sacred for as your own Historian has shewn J. I. History of passive Obedience sup had no right by the Law of the Land Prior to the Peoples Choice more than any body else of the Blood-royal and consequently according to your Advocate the People have been without any Government ever since the death of Queen Elizabeth Nay the Consequence will strike off both the Protestant and the Catholick Queen T. I never trouble my head with Consequences at such a distance But nothing in the English Government except what is done by the Monarch can be justified unless a Precedent can be shewn for it And I am sure no Precedent can be found where ever any English Parliament declared any one to be lawful and rightful King while one who had the Right remain'd alive W. I will grant it while the Right remain'd but they have transferr'd the Right from one to another and declared the Right to be in one who excepting that he was of the Blood-royal had no Right but from their Declaration as to go no backwarder appears in the Case of H. VII T. He had it in right of his Wife W. What think you if I shew this before he married T. The People of that time were better Catholicks than to be guilty of such an Injury to the next Heir W. To convince you of this I will shew you the form of such a Parliamentary Declaration before his Marriage which follows in these words Enry par le grace de Dieu Roy Dengletere de France In that Parliament he was desir'd to marry Seigneur Dirland au Parlement tenuz à Westminster le septisme jour de November l'an du Reigne du Roy Henry le septisme puis le Conquest primer au plesir de Dieu tout puissant bien publique prosperite suertie di cést Realm d'Engletere à la singular comfort de toutz les Subjects du Roy del mesme en remoevement de toutz ambiguitez questions del assent des seigneurs Espirituels Temporels à la request des Communes il est ordeigne establie enact par auctorite du dit Parliament Que les inheritaunces des Corones des Realms d'Engletere de Fraunce ove toutz Preemynence Dignite Royal a yeest appurtenant Et toutz autres Seigneuries au Roy regardantz oultre le mere ovesque les appurtenaunces a queaux en ascun manere duez ou perteignauntz soient estoient remaignent en le tresnoble Person nostre Soveraign Seigneur le Roy Henry le Septisme en les Heirs de son Corps leialment issantz perpetualment ovesque le Grace de Dieu ensy d'endurer in nulls-auters Henry by the Grace of God King of England and France and Lord of Ireland at a Parliament held at Westminster the 7th day of November in the First year of the Reign of King Henry VII since the Conquest For the pleasure of God Almighty the publick Good the Prosperity and Safety of this Realm of England to the singular comfort of the Subjects of the said King and for removing all ambiguities and questions of the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and at the request of the Commons it is ordained established and enacted by authority of the said 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 Seignories belonging to the King beyond Sea with the appurtenances in any manner due to them or appertaining be stand and remain in the most Noble Person of our said Sovereign Lord K. H. 7. and in the Heirs of his body lawfully issuing for ever with the Grace of God there to endure and in no other persons This is to be found in the beginning of the Statutes of H. 7. and was sent to the Sheriffs of the several Counties of England to be proclaimed T. I listened to hear the words Lawful and Rightful W. I take the Recognition in the time of H. 7. to be more full for tho the declaring that King William and Queen Mary are Lawful and Rightful King and Queen and that the Royal Power is entirely vested in them as the Bill of Rights and the last act of Recognition declare strongly implies that King James has no Right Yet it is not so express as the other which places it in H. 7. and the Heirs of his Body and renounces the
THE ANATOMY OF A Iacobite-Tory IN A DIALOGUE BETWEEN WHIG and TORY Occasioned by the ACT for Recognizing KING WILLIAM AND QUEEN MARY LONDON Printed for Richard Baldwin near the Black Bull in the Old-Baily 1690. THE ANATOMY OF A Iacobite-Tory In a DIALOGUE between Whig and Tory occasioned by the Act for Recognizing King WILLIAM and Queen MARY Whig WHither away in so much haste One word with you for the sake of Old Acquaintance when we were fellow-Murmurers in the late Reign Tory. Pray be brief then for I am upon the King's Business and must lose no time W. It is very well if His Majesty's Affairs have lost no time in the hands of Men of your Opinion But you may pardon me if I ask what King you mean King William or the late King T. What a Question is that to one in such an Office as I have under King William W. I very well know your Office tho' how you came into it is a Mystery and I cannot but observe the steps which you have taken since you had it Nay know how much you value your self with your Party upon being the same Man which you were when you shewed your parts in opposing this King 's coming to the Crown and therefore I may very well ask you under the Rose whether you will own King William to be your King T. I should be very unworthy if I did not since I have not only Protection but Profit and Preferment from him W. I grant it would be Unworthiness and downright Treachery not to own him but that makes it never the clearer to me that you do T. I have sworn Allegiance to him and do you think I would Perjure my self W. I cannot tell how far you may have improv'd in Romish Equivocations to evade the plain meaning of what you have sworn T. I make no Evasion for I either declared at the time of swearing or it is implyed in my Oath that it obliges me no farther than not to oppose him or his Arms till I may be able to do it with a fair prospect of Success and without the imputation of acting like a Mad-man W. Did you mean no more when you swore Allegiance to King James T. Yes much more and upon very good Reason for in my very Oath I recogniz'd him to be lawful and rightful King and I swore to do my best Endeavour to disclose and make known unto His Majesty his Heirs and Successors all Treasons and Traiterous Conspiracies which I shall know or hear to be against him or any of them W. I can see no cause to doubt but if you had never sworn Allegiance to King William yet you are bound to the same Allegiance to him which you owed to the late King in vertue of that very Oath which you took to the former as King William is his Successor T. That is very good indeed a Successor to a man alive and in Possession of his Kingdom and the Possession of part is in Law a Possession of the whole befides 't is Heirs and Successors and you will not say that this King or Queen can yet at least be Heirs to the last W. I have long since learnt from Bracton and others that an Heir is from the Inheritance and where-ever the Law or Lawful Authority places that our Allegiance is to follow T. I know of no Authority that can make this King more than King in Fact W. Have not the Nation duly declar'd him King upon the other's Abdication And does not that Declaration manifest or make a Right T. King James could not lose his Right it was inseparable from his Person which he cannot but bear about with him should he go to the Indies Indeed this King got into Possession of part of his Dominions by force King James retir'd out of fear with an intention of returning and we submitted to the Prince of Orange in the day of his Power W. According to you he is neither King of Right nor in Fact as long as the late King is Powerful in Ireland T. Not a word of that I beseech you till his Rival has left England who in the mean while may be called King he has the Sword in his hand and we may be allowed to take Quarter and promise not to fight against him especially since we never lay under any Obligation to fight for the other W. You seem to believe that King William has conquer'd England T. Yes surely does not the Fate of a Nation depend upon its Head If King James was beaten or ran away this must be a virtual beating of the whole Nation W. Then at least King William is Rightful King as he is King by Conquest T. I beg your pardon for that For 1. There ought to have been just cause of War What had he to do to call a Soveraign Prince to Account if he had treated his Subjects as Slaves Besides all that has been said against him or the Servants of his Crown are but the Clamours of Male-contents and blushless Lies as has been well observed by the Eloquent Author of The Magistracy and Government of England Vindicated Third and last Part of The Magistracy and Government Vindicated p. 1. 2. Admit this King had Right to free an Oppressed People and they really had been Oppressed however he ought according to the Law of Nations to have made a Formal Declaaation of War before his coming W. Tho' I admire not your Author whose Character you may see in the Man-Hunter Vid. The Man-Hunter in Answer to the third and last Part of the Magistracy c nor believe that King William coming for our Rescue had need to Proclaim a War yet I must confess the want of Proclaiming War may be a full bar to a Right by Conquest of the Nation But all you say against King William's Right by Law and the Declaration of the People is but a begging the Question T. You will not easily convince me that I go upon wrong grounds W. Whatever your lurking Reasons may be me thinks you should consider the Obligation of the Oath which you have taken to be faithful and bear true Allegiance to King William and Queen Mary by which as much is plainly implyed as was expressed in the Oath of Allegiance sworn to James II. and requir'd by the Statute 3 Jac. I. No more being required by that Statute setting aside what relates to the Pope than was at the Common Law meant in being faithful and bearing true Allegiance to a King of England And by consequence if the late King is still King with you the Oath which you have taken to this is contradictory to the former T. Do you think a Man shall be Perjur'd by Consequences W. Yes no doubt but he may if they are so palpable that he cannot but discern them T. As a Divine of our Church tells us A Modest Examination of the New Oaths by a Divine of the Church of England Printed for Randal