Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	child_n	king_n	lord_n	2,366	5	3.6403	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69269	The speech of the Lord Chancellor of England, in the Eschequer Chamber, touching the post-nati	Egerton, Thomas, Sir, 1540?-1617.	1609 (1609)	STC 7540.5; ESTC S100270	40,281	132

allegeance is due and therefore since shee failed in that she was not to be answered and thereupon she praied licence to departe from her Writte and so she left her suite Now for the reasons which haue beene drawne and strained out of the statute An. 14. Edw. 3. if they bee well examined they serue little for this point which we haue in hand It is to be considered at what time and vpon what occasion that Statute was made King Edw. the third being right heire to the Crowne and Kingdome of Fraunce by descent from his Mother and hauing spent many yeeres for the recouering of the same resolued to take vpon him the Name and Stile of King of France being aduised thereunto by them of Flaunders Hereupon he did take the Stile of King of Fraunce and altered his Seale and his Armes and after a while placed the Armes of France before the ancient Armes of England as they are borne at this day This gaue occasion for the making of this statute for some people Ascun gentes saith the statute seeing this change and considering the large and ample extent and the magnificence of that great Kingdome beganne to doubt that the king would make his Imperiall seate there and conceiued thereby that the kingdome of England being the lesser should bee in subiection of the king and kingdome of France being the greater and to bee gouerned and ruled by a Vice-Roy or Deputy as they saw Ireland was And though in the Kings Stile England was placed before France yet they sawe the Armes of France marshalled before the Armes of England though at the first bearing thereof some say it was not so To cleere this doubt and to take away this feare from the Subiects of England was this Statute made as doth plainely appeare by the wordes of the statute it selfe Now if you will make an apt and proper application of that Case then betweene England and Fraunce to this our Case now betweene Scotland and England it must be thus 1. Edw. 3. then king of England being the lesser had afterwardes the kingdome of France being the greater by descent and tooke the Stile of King of France King Iames king of Scotland beeing the lesser hath afterward the kingdome of England being the greater by descent and taketh the Stile of King of England 2. King Ed. 3. altered his Seale and his Armes and placed the Armes of Fraunce before the Armes of England King Iames hath changed his Seale and his Armes in England and hath placed the Armes of England before the Armes of Scotland 3. It was then doubted that King Edw. 3. would remoue his Court out of England the lesser and keepe his Imperiall seate and state in France the greater King Iames hath indeede remooued his Court out of Scotland the lesser and doth in his royall person with the Queene and Prince and all his Children keepe his Imperiall seate in England the greater 4. In al these the cases agree but yet one difference there is and that is in the Stile For king Ed. 3. in his Stile placed England the lesser being his ancient kingdome before France the greater being newly descended vnto him But King Iames in his Stile placeth England the greater though newly descended vnto him before Scotland the lesser being his ancient kingdome 5. Now this being thus perhappes Scotland might out of this Example haue conceiued the like doubt against England as England did then against France But as there was then no doubt made whether the kings subiects borne in England should be capable of lands in France so out of this statute and vpon this example no doubt can bee inferred whether the kings subiects now borne in Scotland shall be capable of lands in England But all these Obiections and the ground whereupon they are framed viz. Quando duo iura c. haue beene so thorowly and profoundly examined and so learnedly and fully answered and cleered by the Iudges as I make no doubt but all wise and indifferent hearers be well satisfied therein And if there bee any so possessed with a preiudicate opinion against Trueth and Reason that will say in their owne heartes licèt persuaseris non persuadebis so either Serpent-like stop their eares or else wilfully absent themselues because they would not heare the weaknesse and absurdities of their owne conceipts laied open and confuted If there bee any such I say as I trust there bee but few and yet I feare there bee some I would they had learned of Tertullian That Veritas docendo suadet non suadendo docet And I wish that they bee not found among the number of those to whome Saint Paul saieth Si quis ignorat ignoret And Saint Iohn in the Apocalips Qui sordidus est sordescat adhuc And I will exhort with Saint Paul Qui tenet teneat and not wauer or doubt by such weake arguments and obiections But in this new learning there is one part of it so strange and of so daungerous consequent as I may not let it passe viz. That the king is as a king diuided in himselfe and so as two kings of two seuerall kingdomes and that there be seuerall allegeances and seuerall subiections due vnto him respectiuely in regarde of his seuerall kingdomes the one not participating with the other This is a daungerous distinction betweene the King and the Crowne and betweene the King and the kingdome It reacheth too farre I wish euery good subiect to beware of it It was neuer taught but either by traitours as in Spencers Bill in Edward the seconds time which Baron Snig and the Lord chiefe Baron and Lord Coke remembred or by treasonable Papists as Harding in his Confutation of the Apologie maintaineth that Kings haue their authority by the positiue Lawe of Nations and haue no more power than the People hath of whome they take their temporall iurisdiction and so Ficlerus Simanca and others of that crew Or by seditious Sectaries and Puritans as Buchannon De Iure Regni apud Scotos Penry Knox and such like For by these and those that are their followers and of their Faction there is in their Pamphlets too much such traiterous seede sowne But leauing this I will adde a little more to prooue that in reason Robert Caluine and other like Post-nati in Scotland ought by Lawe to be capable of landes in England and for that I wil remember one rule more which is certen and faileth not and ought to bee obserued in all Interpretation of Lawes and that is Ne quid absurdum ne quid illusorium admittatur But vpon this subtle and dangerous Distinction of Faith and Allegeance due to the King and of Faith and Allegeance due to the Crowne and to the Kingdome which is the onely Basis and fundamentall maine reason to disable the Plaintife and all Post-nati there follow too many grosse and fowle absurdities whereof I will touch some few and so conclude that in Lawe and

And whatsoeuer the Spirites the Learning the Wisedome and Knowledge of all the others vpon long study could affoorde was put into the mouth of those few to serue as Organs and Instruments to deliuer it vnto vs which they haue so well and sufficiently performed that they deserue great praise and commendation For in my poore opinion the witte of man could not deuise to say more touching this Question in Lawe than they haue saied And whatsoeuer hath beene sithence spoken for that part it is for the Matter but the same in substance which the counsell at the Barre did deliuer though it hath beene varied in forme and amplified with other wordes and phrases and furnished with shew of some other strained Cases and authorities The handling of it by the learned and reuerend Iudges hath beene such as it may appeare to the world that euerie one hath spoken his owne heart and conscience and hath laboured by long studie to search out the Lawe and the true reason of the Lawe in this rare Case and so they haue spoken as Coram Deo Angelis None with desire to seeme popular for nothing ought to bee tam populare quam veritas None to seeme to be Time-seruers or Men pleasers for the King whome vnder God they serue being Pater patriae and soueraigne head of both these great vnited Kingdomes is to them both like as the head of a naturall body is to all the Members of the same and is not nor can not bee partiall more to one than to an other Hee deliteth in truth and desireth it and without truth hee can not bee pleased Hee ruleth by his Lawe and commaundeth his Iudges to minister to all his Subiects Lawe and Iustice sincerely and truely and equally and indifferently without any partiall respect It was neuer seene but that in all rare and difficult Cases there haue beene diuersitie of Opinions but yet without breach of Charitie which is the Bond of Vnitie So it hath happened in this Case The Case hath beene argued at large by foureteene learned Iudges twelue of them haue concurred in iudgement but vpon seuerall reasons for as many wayes may leade to one end of the iourney so diuerse and seuerall reasons may conduce to one true and certaine conclusion And here I may not omit the woorthie memorie of the late graue and reuerend Iudge Sir Iohn Popham chiefe Iustice of the Kings Bench deceased a man of great wisedome and of singular learning and iudgement in the Lawe who was absolutely of the same opinion as he often declared as well in open Parliament as otherwise The Apostle Thomas doubted of the Resurrection of our Sauiour Iesus Christ when all the rest of the Apostles did firmly beleeue it But that his doubting confirmed in the whole Church the Faith of the Resurrection The two woorthy and learned Iudges that haue doubted in this Case as they beare his Name so I doubt not but their doubting hath giuen occasion to cleare the doubt in others and so to confirme in both the Kingdomes both for the Present and the Future the truth of the iudgement in this Case Thus my Lords haue you hitherto nothing from mee but Amen to that which all the Iudges sauing two haue saied and much more you cannot expect from mee Yet since I must giue iudgement in this Case and I saied in the beginning that I would render the reasons of my iudgement for that is the course of argument I must houlde I will now deliuer vnto you what are the speciall and principall reasons that first haue induced mee and still mooue mee to houlde the opinion that I doe And as I goe I will indeuour to cleere some doubts and questions that partly in the conference in Parliament and partly otherwise I haue heard made not onely touching this Case it selfe but also touching the forme and manner how it is to be decided and iudged The Case is rare and new as it hath beene often saied it was neuer decided Terminis terminantibus It was neuer iudged by any Statute Lawe which is a positiue Lawe nor by iudgement of the Iudges of the common Lawe Now the first Question is as some would haue it How it is to be iudged and by what Lawe and haue wished that it might haue stayed vntill the Parliament and so bee decided by Parliament They that make this doubt I will let them demurre and die in their doubts For the Case beeing adiourned hither before all the Iudges of England is now to be iudged by them according to the common Lawe of England and not tarrie for a Parliament For it is no transcendent Question but that the common Lawe can and ought to rule it and ouer-rule it as Iustice Williams said well But then this Question produceth another That is What is the Common Lawe of England Whether it be Ius scriptum or non scriptum and such other like niceties For wee haue in this Age so many Questionists and Quo modo and Quare are so common in most mens mouthes that they leaue neither Religion nor Lawe nor King nor Counsell nor Policie nor Gouernment out of question And the end they haue in this Question What is the Common Lawe is to shake and weaken the ground and principles of all gouernement And in this particular Question of the Law of England to ouerthrow that Law whereby this Realme hath many hundred yeares beene gouerned in all honour and happinesse or at least to cast an aspersion vpon it as though it were weake and vncertaine I will therefore declare mine opinion in this point plainely and confidently as I thinke in my conscience and as I finde to be sufficiently warranted by ancient Writers and good authorities voide of all exception The common Law of England is grounded vpon the Law of God and extendes it selfe to the originall Lawe of Nature and the vniuersall Lawe of Nations When it respects the Church it is called Lex Ecclesiae Anglicanae as Magna Charta ca. 1. Ecclesia Anglicana habeat omnia sua iura integra illaesa When it respects the Crowne and the King it is sometimes called Lex Coronae as in Stat. 25. Edw. 3. cap. 1. Lex Coronae Angliae est semper fuit c. And it is sometimes called Lex Regia as in Registro fo 61. Ad iura Regia spectat And Ad conseruationem iurium Coronae nostrae ad iura Regia ne depereant c. When it respectes the common subiects it is called Lex Terrae as in Magna Charta ca. 29. Nisi per legale iudicium parium vel per legem Terrae Yet in all these Cases whether it respectes the Church the Crowne or the Subiects it is comprehended vnder this generall tearme The common Lawes of England Which although they bee for a great parte thereof reduced into writing yet they are not originally Leges scriptae This I first learned of the late Lord Treasurer