Selected quad for the lemma: justice_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
justice_n	good_a	law_n	power_n	2,586	5	4.7591	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25456	Animadversions vpon those notes which the late observator hath published upon the seven doctrines and positions which the King by way of recapitulation (hee saith) layes open so offensive	Charles I, King of England, 1600-1649.	1642 (1642)	Wing A3210; ESTC R22035	8,199	9

hold themselves so to bee by the old obligations of Law Presidents and Oathes rather then that the Kings liege-people should bee put wholly to confide to that single obligation of the Iustice and Honour of a Parliament POSITION 3. That they are Parliaments and may judge of publike necessity without the King and dispose of anything OBSERV. They may not desert the King but being deserted by the King when the Kingdome is in distresse they may judge of that distresse and relieve it and are to bee accompted by vertue of representation as the whole body of the State ANIMADVER. 3. His Majesty sets downe this Position in more words but these are much to the same purpose and upon these the inference which His Majesty makes followes undeniably That then the life and liberty of the Subject and all good Lawes made for the security of them may bee disposed of and repealed by the Major part of both Houses at any time present and by any wayes and meanes procured so to bee And His Maiesty shall have no power to protect them They see nothing that see ●ot the misery which may follow upon such a vast transcendency of arbitary power if it were invested in the Parliament which I dare boldly ●●y was never claimed by any Parliament though in conjunction with the ●ead of it the King Every the meanest Subject hath such a right and propriety in his goods that without Law they cannot bee taken from him though to be employed for the publike good And though the safety of the people be the highest Law and that doe many times give a power above other Lawes and against them to the supreme Magistracy in a State to dispose of private mens estates yet the unchangeable rule of Iustice must have place even in that highest Law and that requires a compensation to be made to those whose states or goods are so disposed of and never gives power to uphold the publike good with private injury Nor can it bee imagined that a State upheld by such helps should not be able to make a just compensation to those by whom it was upheld But let us heare our Observatour They may not saith hee desert the King Gramercy for that I am glad to heare they have yet any obligation upon them to tie them to the King Yet I know not well what he meanes by deserting the King if he mean it in that sense which he doth the Kings deserting of them which out of question is his not assenting to whatsoever they shall think fit Then in reason they should not by their disallowing all his Proposals have driven him to dissent from theirs and so to have disserted them Well But being deserted by the King when the Kingdome is in distresse they may judge of that distresse and relieve it Al their power then is upon supposition of the Kings deserting them So that if it appeare that His Majesty hath not deserted them as many good men beleeve he hath not in the redresse of any real grievance then they have no such power And however they claime this power only when the Kingdome is in distresse but how if the Kingdom be not in distresse or at least that distresse be onely or principally caused by their claiming of that power which cannot consist with the Honour and Royall Estate of His Majestly which all men by their late Protestation are bound to defend If it beso we may easily discerne how far they may stretcht this power which they claim onely in order to distresse and that they may make as much use of it as the Pope doth of his power in temporals In ordine ad spiritualia He claimes no more though some have said hee hath right to more and the Parliament will need no more to doe as much as hee takes upon him to doe with Christian Princes and States But they must have a right to their power in this case of distresse whence have they that why they have it as the whole body of the State and that they are and must be so accompted by vertue of representation very good But let us consider his words a little more There is no understanding man but must and will acknowledge unlesse he wilfully derogate from them that the Parliament represents the body of the State for those ends for which they convene as an Ambassadour doth the Prince that sends him in the mannage of that businesse for which hee is sent But this is not an absolute representation to all intents and purposes Besides whom do they represent The Body saith hee of the State Bee it so but it is onely the body without the head And if they were not by representation onely but really the whole body of the People if it were possible they should convene together they are all but an assembly of Subjects of men to be governed not to rule to be commanded not to command their Head and Soueraigne and then there can be no vertue of representation that can advance them to the power which the Observatour ascribes to them when such power was never in the whole body which is represented No never such power in the whole body I know the Observatours stomack will rise here Did not the Peoples consent at first make Kings and conveigh power into their hands Truely Sir not solely but grant it what then Marry he saith then it is a principle in nature Quic quid efficit tale est magis tale In English If the People make a King they are more King themselves or if they give power they have more power and may resume and exercise that power when they please Excellent learning and well applied I believe hee learned this piece from Suarez the Iesuite But the Observatour may know that that rule admits many limitations and surely it holds onely in causis totalibus which the People are not in the constitution of Kings But suppose their consent did at first give power to Kings when their consent is given for them and their Successours to a King and his Heires can the succeeding People cut off the entaile and retract the consent their Ancestours have given By what right with what justice I know not but the People may contract for them and their Successours in the conveyance of Soveraigne power if ever they had it in their hands to give as any man may in the conveyance of his lands or goods and that such conveyance may be as binding to Successours in the one as in the other and then I am sure they cannot have power at all times and in all succeeding ages to resume what they have so given Our Kings right so farre as it is derived from the People is of this kind And if he had no other grounds for his claime of Soveraignty as it is most certaine that he hath such a consent once granted were sufficient to bind the People that it cannot ever bee lawfull for them by a major part of

ANIMADVERSIONS Vpon those Notes which the late Observator hath published upon the seven Doctrines and Positions which the KING by way of Recapitulation hee saith layes open so offensive POSITION I. THat the Parliament has an absolute indisputable power of declaring Law so that all the right of the King and People depends upon their pleasure To this the Observator saith It has beene answered That this Power must rest in them or in the King or in some inferiour Court or els all suits will be endlesse and it cannot rest more safely then in Parliament ANIMADVERSION I. THe Observator hath contracted his Maiesties words but hath kept the sense in more generall termes and seemes though but faintly to justifie the Position by approving I know not whose answer That this Power can rest no where more safely then in Parliament He meanes the Parliament without the King If he had allowed the King his place in Parliament I know no understanding man but will easily subscribe That the King in Parliament or the Parliament with him have an absolute undisputable power both to make and declare Law and to end all Suites of what kind soever determinable by humane law within the Kingdome And here is the most safe resting of this Power and here it hath ever rested and not in the King alone who claimes not that Power but is willing to governe his Subjects according to the knowne Lawes and much lesse in any inferiour Court But that such an absolute undisputable Power of declaring Law as hath lately bin assumed by the Major part of the present sitting Parliament should be resting in them is neither necessary for the ending of Suites nor can be safe either for King or Subject If they may declare that for a Law a fundamentall Law which never yet was Enacted or had any being and deny the plain undoubted Lawes that have beene Enacted or frustrate them by some unheard of interpretation as if such interpretation had been some mentall or rather Parliamentall reservation laid up within the Parliament walles to be produced upon emergent occasions by their successors they will have so full an Arbitrary power that the right and safety of King and People must wholly depend upon their Votes Which power can never be safe either for King or People nor can they produce one president that may warrant such a Power But they are not bound or limited by such presidents That 's the second Position POSIT 2. That Parliaments are bound to no Presidents OBSERV Statutes are not binding to them why should then Presidents Yet there is no obligation stronger then the honour and justice of a Parliament ANIMAD. 2. If Statutes be not binding to them there is no reason that presidents should be And he saith true Statutes are not binding to them that is de facto they are not for they in some things goe directly against them but de jure they are that is they ought to be binding to them till they be repealed by the same power they were made that is by Bill orderly passed both Houses and ratified by his Majesties Royall assent And unlesse they can shew better reason then their bare Assertion Presidents as they are the best warrant so they are and ought to be the limits and bounds of their proceedings He might have said as truly That Oathes are not binding to them and therefore neither Statutes nor Presidents But the Observator tells us Pag 44. That the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance are not endangered by making the Kingdom and not the King the proper subject of Power And he yeelds reason for it For saith he hee that ascribes more to the whole Universality then to the King yet ascribes to the King a true Supremacy of Power and Honour above all particulars I wonder what he meanes by a true Supremacie of Power and Honour above all particulars Surely he meanes nothing but priority of place and height of Title for he is allowed little power over some particulars namely over the Members of either house and whom else they please to exempt as they did Serjeant Major Skippon for his Power and Commands But this distinction helpes them The Members of either House are sharers in that Supremacie which is in the Vniversality and above his and by the power of that Supremacie they can exempt whom they please from the power of this Inferiour pardon the ph●se absurdities cannot be exprest without a Solecisme Supremacy Very good But in good sober sadnesse doth the Observator thinke this distinction was thought on by the Framers and enjoyners of that Oath or that the Members of the House at their entring the House did take their Oath to the King as to the Supreame over all with exception of themselves or reservation of an higher Supremacy to themselves when they should be entred It is hardly credible Nor doe all that desire to tender all due honour to the Parliament beleeve that they are so the Vniversality or the Kingdome as the Observatour presumes They are trusted by the Vniversality and Kingdome and wee pray that they may dischardge that trust not knowing but that a multitude of men subject every one of them to errour may faile in their judgement and being not exempted from the common condition of the sinfull Sonnes of Adam may possibly not rightly dischardge the trust committed to them as well as the King who is blasted with foule sailings anderrours and judgement Mee thinkes men that so much detest Popery should not borrow the grounds of their reasoning from them and I shall as soone beleeve the Councell of Trent telling us that they are the Vniversall Church and therefore cannot possibly erre as that the Parliament is the Vniversall unerring and unpervertibly just body of the Kingdome And surely the Spirit of declaring must needs reside in a strangely large measure in them who have power thus to declare not onely Law but Oathes too a greater then which the Popes flatterers never gave him and hardly ever any Pope assumed so great Quo te constringam mutantem protea nodo How shall these men bee bound to doe right who so easily unty the knots of these sacred bookes of Law and Oathes why yes There is a bond that will doe it The obligation of the Iustice and honour of a Parliament But can any man bee sure that they whom neither Law Custome and Presidents of their Ancestours nor Oathes can bind will bee alwayes held in by the obligation of Iustice and Honour Is it not possible that they may in time find a power in themselves of declaring that obligation void as well as have done the other The same obligation of Iustice and Honour is as strong upon Kings and hath ever beene held more powerfull and obstrictive in them then in any state mannaged by a Community and yet they dare not trust his Majesty though so obliged The Observatour then must pardon mee if I desire they may rather bee held in and