which you may read at large in Bodin But I come to the second That the Kingdoms of England c. are a Supreme Imperial Monarchy which will the better appear when by examining those marks of Sovereignty we find no more in them than what the Laws of these Realms have ever acknowledg'd to be the undoubted right of our Kings and that whether we respect the Common Law Statute Law or their Power in Ecclesiasticks I 'll take my rise from the marks of Sovereignty 1. The Power of making Laws The Laws of most Kingdoms saith the Lord Bacon have been like Buildings of many pieces patcht up from time to time according to the occasion without form or model and as to our own that they are mixt as our Language of British Roman Saxon Danish Norman Customs Edgar the Saxon collected those of his time and gave them the force of a Fagot bound which formerly were dispersed The Danes impos'd upon us their Dane-Law And the third of that name before the Conquest Ex immensa Legum congerie quas Britanni Romani Angli Daci condiderunt optima quaeque selegit in unam coegit quod vocari voluit Legem communem Some of which bear his name to this day as Ordain'd by him After him William the Conqueror whom Polidor Virgil calls our Law-giver brought in somewhat of a new Law as may be seen in this That tho he made but little or no alteration in the Fundamentals but formulis juris he found here yet whether it were to honor his own Language or to shew some mark of Conquest he set forth his Publick Edicts in the Norman Tongue and caused our Laws to be written in the same And likewise his Justiciaries Lawyers and Ministerial Officers being at that time all Normans it may be none of the least reasons why all our Pleadings and Entries were in that Tongue until altered by Statute That because of the great mischiefs that had hapned to divers by means of the said Laws being written in the French Tongue which they understood not That therefore all Pleas for the future should be pleaded in the English Tongue and enrolled in the Latin and that we receiv'd our ancient Tenures from the Normans is obvious every where And King John planted the English Laws in Ireland But to come nearer home and examin how our present constitutions agree with it nor are they other than what has been the Practice of all former Parliaments wherein both Houses are so subordinate to the King in the making of Laws that neither of them singly nor both of them together can make any binding Law without the Kings concurrence they might in all times 't is true propose advise or consent or to borrow a Metaphor Spawn of themselves but in the Royal Consent only like the male touch lay the vis plastica which gave the Embrion life and quicken'd it into Laws and the reason of it is because the Legislative Power resideth solely in the King ut in subjecto proprio and the consent of the Lords and Commons is no sharing of that Power which is indivisible but a requisite condition to complete the Kings Power for otherwise all those Bills that have pass'd both Houses and for want of the Royal-Assent lie buried in oblivion might as occasion serv'd be rak'd from their forgotten Embers and set up for Laws Which also further appears in the several forms of our Kings giving their Royal Assent as Le Roy voit Le Roy est Assensus Le Roy Advisera c. and makes good this point That the Power of making Laws resides in the King and that he may as he sees cause either refuse or ratifie And this the Law of Scotland calls his Majesties best and most incommunicable Prerogative And as the Legislative Power resides in the King solely so also to him belongs it to interpret those Laws Si disputatio oriatur Justiciarii non possunt eam interpretari sed in dubiis obscuris Domini Regis erit expectanda interpretatio voluntas cum ejus sit interpretari cujus est condere saith the Lord Ellesmer from Bracton and Britton His is the interpretation of the Law whose is the Power of making the Law In his recurrendum ad Regem justitiae fontem whence he is said to carry all the Laws in scrinio pectoris sui in his Breast To give one instance for all When King Charles the First of happy memory had just given his Royal Assent to the Petition of Right he told the Houses That his meaning was to confirm all their Liberties as knowing that according to their own Protestations they neither meant nor could hurt his Prerogative c. And on the last day of the Session before his Royal Assent to the Bills saying he would tell them the cause why he came so suddenly to end that Session he adds Tho I must avow that I own an account of my actions to none but God And again charging both Houses with their Profession during the hammering that Petition that it was in no ways to trench upon his Prerogative saying they had neither intention nor power to hurt it he commands them all to take notice that what he had spoken was the true meaning of what he had granted But especially adds his Majesty you my Lords the Judges for to you only under me belongs the Interpretation of Laws for none of the Houses of Parliament joynt or separate what new Doctrin soever may be raised have any power either to make or declare a Law without my consent And as the King is the sole Lawgiver and Interpreter of that Law when given so also is he exempt and free from the Law for as much as concerneth the coactive force of the Law as being the Head of the Law and of the Common-wealth and consequently no man can give Sentence of condemnation against him if he do any thing against that Law for besides that every Sentence must be given by a Superior upon his Inferior there must be some Supreme whereunto all are subject but it self to none because otherwise the course of Justice would go infinitely in a Circle every Superior having his Superior without end which cannot be yet admitting it might the People cannot do it for they have no power themselves or if they had are his Subjects and a Parliament cannot do it for besides that they are his Subjects also and not his Peers who shall try him for he is Principium Caput finis Parliamenti and it can neither begin nor end without his Presence in Person or by Representation and hence it is that his Death Dissolves them Again if the People may call him to account the State is plainly Democratical if the Peers it is Aristocratical if either or both of them 't is no way Monarchical which is directly contrary
A DISCOURSE OF Monarchy More particularly of the IMPERIAL CROWNS OF England Scotland and Ireland According to the Ancient Common and Statute-Laws of the same With a Close from the whole As it relates to the Succession of his ROYAL HIGHNESS JAMES Duke of York DEUT. 4.32 Interroga de diebus antiquis qui fuerunt ante te ex die quo creavit Dominus hominem super terram c. LONDON Printed by M. C. for Jos. Hindmarsh Bookseller to his Royal Highness at the Black Bull in Cornhil 1684. To the most Honorable JAMES Duke of ORMOND c. Lord Lieutenant of Ireland May it please your Grace IT was a saying of the late Earl of Ossory Lord Deputy of Ireland your Son at what time he deliver'd up the Sword of that Kingdom to the Lord Lieutenant Berkeley Action is the life of Government Common experience tells us Usefulness is the end of Action and without which like a Glass-eye to a Body a man rather takes up a room than becomes any way serviceable The sense of this put me on those thoughts I herewith present your Grace and unto whom more fitly than to a Person in the defence of which few men sate longer at Helm or suffer'd more You that hung not up your Shield of Faith in the Temple of Despair and never seem'd more worthy of the great place you now fill than when farthest from it Nor am I in the so doing without some prospect of advantage to my self in as much as if the censuring Age shall handle me roughly on this account under your great Patronage I shall fight in the Shade And now my Lord I was just breaking off when it came into my head that I had in some of our late pieces found Sir Edward Coke often quoted especially to the defence of those Notions which had better slept in their forgotten Embers and therefore I thought it not altogether forein to the matter that I us'd the words of S. Peter 2 Pet. 3.16 touching S. Paul's Epistles In which saith he are some things hard to be understood which they that be unlearned and unstable wrest as also they do the other Scriptures to their own destruction I have purposely made use of him in many places as an high Assertor of Monarchy and Prerogative Those that find him otherwise Habeant secum serventque Or let him lie indifferent my Argument depends not singly on him which I humbly took leave to advert and am May it please your Grace Your most Obedient Obliged humble Servant John Wilson THE CONTENTS Sect. I. THat Monarchy or the Supreme Dominion of one person was primarily intended by God when he created the World That it is founded in nature As consonant to the Divine Government And of Divine Institution Acknowledg'd by Heathens as well as Christians 1 Sect. II. That Adam held it by Divine right Cain a Monarch By the Kingdoms of the most ancient Gentiles not God's but Monarchs were denoted That the origiginal of Power came not from the People by way of Pact or Contract The unreasonableness and ill consequence of the contrary Noah and his Sons Kings A Family an exemplary Monarchy in which the Pater-familias had power of life and death by the right of Primogeniture Examples of the exercise of it in Judah Abraham Jephthah Brutus Vpon the increase of Families they still continued under one head Esau. The four grand Monarchies Ancients and Moderns universally receiv'd it as precedent to all other Governments 12 Sect. III. That all Governments have a natural tendency to Monarchy Their several Forms and Rotations Of Aristocracy Democracy Tyranny to be rather wisht than either Examples of Athens and Rome the first Consulate Their Tribunes several Seditions Marius and Sylla Crassus Caesar Pompey The two latter divide Caesar complemented to Rome by the Senate The Triumvirate their Proscriptions and breach No peace till Monarchy restor'd under Augustus The sense of those times touching this matter 34 Sect. IV. That the Kingdom of the Jews was a Supreme Sovereign Monarchy in which their Kings had the absolute Power of Peace and War and were Supreme in Ecclesiasticis And an Answer to that Objection That God gave them a King in his wrath 62 Sect. V. What is here intended by a Supreme Monarchy The marks of Sovereignty as the Power of making Laws and exemption from any coactive obedience to them The Power of Peace and War c. That the Kingdoms of England c. are Supreme Imperial Monarchies Those two marks of Sovereignty and seven others prov'd to be no other than what has ever been the undoubted Right of the Kings of England The Kings Sovereignty by the Common Law The like from the Statute Law Power in Ecclesiasticks And that they have justly used those Titles of King and Emperor and that from ancient times and before the Conquest 67 Sect. VI. That the King is none of the Three Estates in which two preliminary Objections are examin'd by Reason and answered by the manner of the Three Estates applying to him What the Three Estates are To presume him one of them were to make him but a Co-ordinate Power The King cannot be said to Summon or Supplicate himself How will the Three Estates be made out before the Commons came in With a short Series during the Saxons to the latter end of Henry III. in all which time they are not so much as nam'd as any constituent part of a Parliament And the time when probably they first came in to be as they are at this day one of the three Estates That the Lords Temporal were never doubted but to be an Estate Four reasons offer'd that the Lords Spiritual are one other Estate distinct from the Lords Temporal and one Act of Parliament in point With other Authorities to prove the Assertion 181 Sect. VII Admitting what has been before offer'd wherein has our present King merited less than any of his Royal Ancestors with a short recapitulation of Affairs as they had been and were at his Majesties most happy Restauration and that he wanted not the means of a just Resentment had he design'd any 181 Sect. VIII That notwithstanding the hard Law of the Kingdom the Jews paid their Kings an entire Obedience Two Objections answered The like other Nations to their Kings A third Objection answered The Precept of Obedience is without restriction Examples upon it Nor is Idolatry any ground to resist much less things indifferent The example from our Saviour in Instituting his last Supper Least of all is injury with the practice of Holy men of old in like cases And that if any ground were to be admitted that would never be wanting 189 Sect. IX The Arts of the late times in working the People from this Obedience It was to be done piece-meal The Kings Necessities answered with Complaints Plots discovered Fears and Jealousies promoted Religion cants its part Leading men some to make it Law others Gospel The examples of Corah c.
setling the Common-wealth which was much out of order had chief Power and Authority for five years which expiring they refus'd to resign but held it other five enacting or reversing what laws they pleas'd and that without the consent of the Senate or People and having divided one Common-wealth into three Monarchies viz. Africk both the Sardinia's and Sicily to Octavius All Spain and Gallia Narbonensis i. e. Languedoc Daulphine and Provence to Lepidus and the rest of France of either side the Alps to Antony the defence of Rome and Italy is left to Lepidus while the other two advance against Brutus and Cassius who by a mistake having lost the day kill themselves Upon this the Conquerors return to Rome and exercising all cruelty whatever without any regard of person or condition they proscribe and banish at pleasure Lepidus gave up his Brother Lucius Paulus to gratifie Octavius Antony his Uncle L. Caesar to requite Lepidus And Octavius his friend Cicero whose advice had given him the Empire to appease inexorable Antony concerning the Philippicks And now nothing but slaughter bestrid the Streets when besides the incredible number of Roman Knights and Citizens kill'd in the broil there were no less than 130 Senators proscrib'd between them and of whom those last mentioned were three And now one would think all had been at quiet the Common-wealth as I said before being divided into three Monarchies and Antony married to the Sister of Octavius yet all would not do for Antony being gone for Egypt and Sextus Pompeius overthrown Octavius makes War on Lepidus whose softness and irresolution made him submit with the loss of his share of the Triumvirate and thence to keep a War as he had never less than reason to suspect it from home he follows Antony whose sensuality and unpursutiveness lost him the sole Empire of the World for Octavius having overcome him and Cleopatra in the Naval Battle of Actium the Morning and the Evening of the Roman State made but one day and the Sovereignty once more coming into one hand the Temple of Janus was now the third time clos'd Upon which applying himself to preserve that peace he had so happily restor'd he made severe Laws to restrain those evils a peaceable Age is but too prone to run into in due sense of which it was debated in Senate An quia condidisset imperium Romulus vocaretur sed sanctius reverentius visum est nomen Augusti And it may be observ'd that from the expulsion of the Roman Kings to the Reign of Octavius Augustus about 450 years there was seldom above 10 years without some Civil War or some Sedition whereas Augustus kept the Empire in peace for above 50 years and so it continu'd after his death till the Pretorian Bands began to chaffer for the Empire and others to comply with them gave an Empire for an Empire And now e're I close the Argument it may not be amiss to recollect what the Historians and Poets that speak of those times thought of it Neque aliud discordantis reipublicae remedium quam ut ab uno regeretur saith Tacitus Nor is Florus who wrote not long after him in any thing short of him Gratulandum tamen in tanta perturbatione est quod potissimum ad Octavium Caesarem summa rerum rediit qui sapientia sua atque solertia perculsum undique perturbatum ordinavit imperii corpus Quod ita haud dubie nunquam coire consentire potuisset nisi unius praesidis nutu quasi anima mente regeretur We have this yet in so great a confusion to be glad at that the upshot of all came back to Octavius Caesar rather than another who by his Wisdom and Policy brought the shatter'd and disorder'd body of the Empire into frame again which without dispute had never met and joyn'd together had it not been actuated by one chief Ruler as with a Soul and Intelligence And to the same purpose L. Ampelius who wrote before the division of the Empire speaking of the several turns of the state of Rome and the uncertain condition of the people Donec exortis bellis civilibus inter Caesarem Pompeium oppressa per vim libertate sub unius Caesaris potestatem redacta sunt omnia Until those Civil Wars between Caesar and Pompey began and the publick liberty over-born by violence all things were reduced under rhe obedience of one Caesar. And what the much ancienter Homer's sense of having many Lords was we have every where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nec multos regnare bonum Rex unicus esto And the reason of it is clear Nulla fides regni sociis omnisque potestas Impatiens consortis erit And so another Summo nil dulcius unum est Stare loco sociisque comes discordia regnis From all which we may gather That all Governments of what kind soever have a natural tendency to Monarchy and like Noah's Dove find no rest till they return to the same station whence they first departed It being impossible otherwise but that as Lines from the Center the farther they run the farther they must separate SECTION IV. That the Kingdom of the Jews was a Supreme Sovereign Monarchy in which their Kings had the absolute Power of Peace and War and were Supreme in Ecclesiasticis And an Answer to that Objection That God gave them a King in his wrath I Have hitherto according to my method propos'd discours'd of Monarchy in general it remains now that I bring it down to some particulars I 'll begin with the Kingdom God erected among the Jews his own People and shew That the Monarchy among them was supreme and independent And here we 'l take the case as we find it in Samuel Samuel was become old and his Sons not walking in his ways had distasted the People who ask of him a King to judg them like all the Nations Samuel is displeas'd but God commands him to hearken to them howbeit to protest solemnly against them and shew them the manner of the King that was to reign over them which he accordingly does viz. He will take your sons and appoint them for himself for his chariots and to be his horsemen and some shall run before his chariots He will take your fields and your vineyards and your oliveyards even the best of them and give them to his servants c. A hard saying no doubt whether we respect their persons or their possessions and yet he calls it Jus Regis qui imperaturus est vobis thereby also implying that such was the manner of all other Nations And when he wrote it in a Book and laid it up before the Lord he calls it Legem Regni The Law of the Kingdom and yet a King they must have and had him adding to that of Samuel this other of their own desires that he might have the absolute power
of Peace and War and this appears within the very letter of their demands viz. That he might judg them which is the power of Peace and go out before them and fight their Battels which is the power of War And what Authority he had in matters of the Church may be seen in this That Solomon of himself thrust out Abiathar the High-Priest and appointed Zadok in his room And that even the Horns of the Altar were no Sanctuary against him in case of Treason may be also seen in Adonijah and Joab and yet we cannot so much as gather that God was offended with him for his so doing or that his person was the less acceptable to him by reason of those matters To which if it be objected That God gave them a King in his anger I answer Moses having foretold the Israelites that when they came into the Land they would be asking a King charges them to set him over them whom God should choose which shews That a popular Election was utterly forbidden them yet they weary of such Judges as had succeeded Moses and whom God had raised to rule them as Kings demand a King like all the Nations i. e. of a more absolute power than those Judges had and therefore not staying Gods time but taking upon them to be their own Carvers he is said to have given them a King in his wrath in that they had not rejected Samuel but himself who had appointed Samuel In acknowledgment of which and as sensible of their error they ever after accepted their Kings by Succession unless only when their Prophets had anointed and ordained another by Gods special designation Nor do we find any one in Holy Writ chosen King by the Children of Israel but Abimelech the Bastard of Gideon and Creature of the People who also came in by Conspiracy and Murder And as it seems probable Jeroboam who made Israel to sin for they had sent to him at that time a discontented Fugitive in Egypt and he headed them in a complaint of Grievances to Rehoboam which occasion'd the revolt of the ten Tribes both which yet reigned as wickedly as they entred unjustly and perish'd miserably SECTION V. What is here intended by a Supreme Monarchy The marks of Sovereignty as the Power of making Laws and exemption from any coactive obedience to them The Power of Peace and War c. That the Kingdoms of England c. are Supreme Imperial Monarchies Those two marks of Sovereignty and seven others prov'd to be no other than what has ever been the undoubted Right of the Kings of England The Kings Sovereignty by the Common Law The like from the Statute Law Power in Ecclesiasticks And that they have justly used those Titles of King and Emperor and that from ancient times and before the Conquest I Have now brought my Discourse whither I first design'd it and therefore to avoid confusion which ever attends the being too general I shall first shew my Reader what I mean by a Supreme Imperial Monarch at this day and in the next place prove the Kings of England c. are such And lastly that however the Emperors of the West and East have so much striven about that great Title of Emperor or Basileus that yet the Kings of England as Supreme within their Dominions have also and justly from ancient Ages used it as no less proper to their own independent greatness As to the first The Regal Estate and Dignity of a King is of two sorts The one Imperial and Supreme as England France Spain c. who owing no service to the Majesty of another is his own Master and hath an absolute Power in himself no way subject to the controul of another and of such a one speaks Martial Qui Rex est Regem Maxime non habeat The other an Homager or Feudatary to another King as his Superior Lord such as that of Navar and Portugal of old to Castile Granada and Leon to Aragon Lombardy Sicily Naples and Bohemia to the Empire six parts of the Saxon Heptarchy who acknowledged the seventh Anglorum Rex primus and such was Aella King of Sussex the Kings of Man and others of whom I shall have occasion to speak hereafter hereafter The first of these is what I intend and will be the better made out if we cast our eyes a little on the marks of Sovereignty and then consider wherein they differ from our own Laws And amongst others we find these 1. The Power of making Laws and so what our English Translation calls Judah my Law-giver is in the vulgar Latin Juda Rex meus Judah my King This power being one of the principal ends of Regal Authority and was in Kings by the Law of Nature long before Municipal Laws had any Being the people at that time being govern'd by a natural equity which by the Law of Nature all were bound to observe And so the Poet Remo cum fratre Quirinus Jura dabat populo The like of King Priam Jura vocatis More dabat populis And of Augustus Legesque tulit justissimus Auctor So Cicero speaking of Julius Caesar as a Law-giver saith thus Caesar si ab eo quaereretur quid egisset in Toga Leges se respondisset multas praeclaras tulisse Though many yet received Laws at the will of their Prince and thus Barbaris pro legibus semper imperia fuerunt which word barbarous at that time carry'd no disgrace with it but was apply'd to them that spoke a strange Language And so the Hebrews called the Egyptians of all other Nations the most civiliz'd and learned for that they us'd the Egyptian Tongue and not the Hebrew as we have it in the Psalmist When Israel came out of Egypt and the house of Jacob de gente barbaro from a people of strange language And as they gave Laws to others so were they loosed from the force of them themselves i. e. from all coactive Obedience or Obligation to any written or positive Law Thus M. Antony when press'd by his Cleopatra to call Herod in question answer'd It was not fitting a King should give an account of what he did in his Government it being in effect to be no King at all And to the same purpose Pliny Ereptum principi illud in principatu beatissimum quod non cogitur Another mark of Sovereignty is the power of Peace and War and which as Bodin says was never doubted to be in a King In like manner to create and appoint Magistrates especially such as are not under the command of others The power of the last appeal To confer Honors To pardon Offenders To appoint the Value Weight and Stamp of his own Coin and make Forein Coin currant by Proclamation To receive Liege Homage of an inferior King And bear those Titles of Sacred and Majesty only proper to Sovereign Princes apart from all others of
to the known Laws of the Land for Omnis sub Rege ipse sub nullo nisi tantum sub Deo Every man is in subjection to the King and he to none but God and so the Oath of Supremacy declares him the onely Supreme Governor of this Realm of which more hereafter when I come to speak of the Statute-Law and therefore if the King refuse to do right seeing no Writ can issue against him there is a place for Petition and if that prevail not Satis ei erit ad poenam saith the same Bracton quod Dominum habeat ultorem And with this agreeth that of Horace Regum timendorum in proprios greges Reges in ipsos imperium est Jovis And in this respect a Prince is not loosed from the Law for as much as concerneth the directive Power of it but having not the Law becomes a Law to himself as well knowing Observantior aequi Fit Populus nec ferre negat cum viderit ipsum Auctorem parere sibi 2. As to the Power of Peace and War It is the right of the King saith Fitzherbert to defend his Kingdom as well against the Sea as against Enemies which implies that it is his right to defend it against Enemies and how can he do it without the right of his Sword when if he should be oblig'd to pray in Aid of others perhaps they may be of another mind or take up so much time in the Debate that the Kingdom may be lost ere they resolve what to do And this I take to be one of the effects of Con-si-de-ra-ti-on in those matters whose good or ill fortune solely depends on Expedition and Secresie for Dangers as the Lord Bacon saith are better met half way than by keeping too long a watch upon their approaches for if a man watch too long 't is odds he will fall asleep But to proceed Sir Edw. Cooke says no Subject can levy War within the Realm without Authority from the King unto whom it only belongeth and that it was High-Treason at the Common Law before the Statute De proditionibus And in Calvin's case he makes it clear That to make Leagues or denounce War only belongs to the King who without his Subjects may grant Letters of safe Conduct and Denization and that this high point of Prerogative Royal cannot be conferred upon any other it being a right of Majesty and among the badges of Supreme Power And now one would think this were enough and yet a late Statute of this Kingdom makes it yet clearer it being thereby declared That the sole Supreme Government Command and disposition of the Militia and all Forces by Sea and Land and of all Forces and places of Strength is and by the Law of England ever were the undoubted right of his Majesty and his Royal Predecessors Kings and Queens of England and that both or either of the Houses of Parliament cannot nor ought to pretend to the same nor can nor lawfully may raise or levy War Offensive or Defensive against his Majesty his Heirs and lawful Successors c. all which is not introductive of a new Law but declaratory of the old as may be further seen by the penning thereof And now what can be added more but the Purse without which what 's the Sword but as the Greek Proverb has it A Bow without a Bow-man For in as much as Mony is the Sinews of War and Peace firmamentum belli ornamentum pacis they that hang the Sword on one side and the Purse on the other seem to me to hazard both for neither can any sudden danger of which the King was ever thought the Judg be stav'd off nor War carried on nor the Publick Peace be long preserv'd without it And therefore on such occasions have Parliaments advis'd and assisted the King in supplying his Wants without directing him it seeming hard that he should have Power to Proclaim War and not be able to maintain it and be bound to defend his Subjects but deny'd the means Qui dirimit medium destruit finem 3. As to the creation and appointing Magistrates and Officers especially such as are not under the command of others this also resides solely in the King for besides what I have said in the last Paragraph touching his sole Power in the ordering and disposing the Militia and all Forces by Sea and places of Strength by Land His is the appointing all the great Officers and Ministers of the Realm whether Spiritual or Temporal the highest immediately by himself the inferior mediately by Authority derived from him and as it were De lumine lumen So the King appoints the Lord Commissioner and all other the grand Ministers and Officers of Scotland and the Lord Lieutenant Lord Deputy Lords Justices and all other the grand Ministers and Officers of Ireland who also but in his Kings name appoint under him according to the extent of their respective Commissions so the Kings of England have and may at this day by Letters Patents make a Prorex Locum tenens or Guardian of the Realm before whom in their absence in remotis a Parliament may be held And such was Edward Duke of Cornwal 13 Edw. 3. Lionel Duke of Clarence 21 Edw. 3. John Duke of Bedford 5 Henry 5. And the Test of the Writ of Summons shall be in the Guardians name or by Commission under the great Seal to certain Lords of Parliament authorise them to hold a Parliament the King being then in the Realm but indisposed and such was that 3 Edw. 4. to William Lord Arch-Bishop of York and that other 28 Eliz. to John Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and others ad inchoandum c. ad Procedendum c. ad faciendum omnia singula c. nec non ad Parliamentum adjournandum Prorogandum c. And so are Parliaments held in Scotland and Ireland before the Lords Commissioners Lord Lieutenant Lord Deputy c. of the respective Kingdoms 4. The Power of the last Appeal i. e. from whose Sentence no Appeal lies The only person besides the Kings of England that ever pretended to it here was the Pope tho yet the first attempt ever made that way was by Anselme Arch-Bishop of Canterbury in the Reign of King William Rufus but it took no effect And the Arch-Bishop concerning himself too much touching the Jurisdiction of the Pope in England the King told him Ad Officium Imperatoris spectat c. That it belong'd to the Emperor to make whom he pleas'd Pope and that for the same reason no Arch-Bishop or Bishop within his Realm should yield any subjection to the Court or Pope of Rome and chiefly in this respect cum ipse omnes libertates haberet in regno suo quas Imperator vindicabat in Imperio That he had the same Prerogative in his Kingdom that the Emperor claim'd in the Empire And
Assistance of God King of Britain And Edwine in a Charter of his to the Abbey of Crowland is stiled Edwinus Anglorum Rex totius Britanniae telluris Gubernator Rector Edwine King of the English and of all the British Land Director and Governor In like manner Ethelred in a Charter of his to the Church of Canterbury stiles himself Angligenum Orcadarum necne in gyro jacentium Monarchus Monarch or sole Governor of the English the Isles of Orkeney and all that lie within that Circuit but subscribes it Ego Aethelredus Anglorum Induperator c. I Ethelred Emperor of the English And besides what I said before of King William Rufus that said he had the same Prerogatives in his Kingdom as the Emperor claim'd in the Empire in a Charter of his to the Monastery of Shaftsbury he says Ego Willielmus Rex Anglorum anno ab incarnatione 1089. secundo anno mei Imperii I William King of the English in the year of our Lord 1089. and of my Empire the second And now having brought it thus far I shall in the next place examin the unreasonableness of that new Notion that the King is one of the three Estates and doubt not but to prove the contrary to any man but him who will not be persuaded tho you shall have persuaded him SECTION VI. That the King is none of the Three Estates in which two preliminary Objections are examin'd by Reason and answered by the manner of the Three Estates applying to him What the Three Estates are To presume him one of them were to make him but a Co-ordinate Power The King cannot be said to Summon or Supplicate himself How will the Three Estates be made out before the Commons came in With a short Series during the Saxons to the latter end of Henry III. in all which time they are not so much as nam'd as any constituent part of a Parliament And the time when probably they first came in to be as they are at this day one of the three Estates That the Lords Temporal were never doubted but to be an Estate Four reasons offer'd that the Lords Spiritual are one other Estate distinct from the Lords Temporal and one Act of Parliament in point With other Authorities to prove the Assertion THose that would have the King one of the Three Estates say That our Government is a kind of mixt Monarchy inasmuch as in our Parliaments the Lower House as representing the Commons bear a semblance of a Democracy and the Lords of Aristocracy And others That the King Lords and Commons who as Assembled joyntly to the end of Legislation as one Corporation and no otherwise are the Law-giver We 'll examin it by reason which Neque decipitur nec decipit usquam and only commands belief when all things else beg it And here to come as near the wind as I can that I may the better get up with them admitting the semblance but not granting the thing what does this make for them or serve to prove that yet the Government is not a free Monarchy because the Supreme Authority as I said ere while resteth neither in the one House or the other either joyntly or severally but solely in the King at whose pleasure they are assembled and without whose Royal Assent they can make no Law to oblige the Subject And therefore not denying Bodin's distinction of a Lordly Monarch a Royal Monarch and a Tyrannical Monarch which relateth only to the Power and Practice of the Monarch yet the distinction of a Supreme and mixt Monarchy which designeth the manner of the Government is a contradiction in Terminis because that Government which extendeth it self to more than one can never be a Monarchy as is obvious to every one that understandeth the word Monarchy and was never heard of in our Land till the men of our late times instead of suppressing Idolatry c. had fram'd a new Idol of their own and having made it as gay as they could set it up to be ador'd by the Multitude always prone to admire every thing they least understand And what must the consequence of it be but that the Government must be partly Monarchical partly Aristocratical and partly Democratical which are in themselves contrary and to be governed by contrary Laws and if it be impossible to make any good out of two extremes as Monarchy and Democracy are what then shall be made of three confounded among themselves or how can it be that Sovereignty a thing indivisible can at one and the same time be divided between one Prince the Nobility and the People in common and not to be altogether a State Popular or at best a Venetian Republick wherein albeit there be but one Duke and He for life yet his person being not invested with the Supreme Power of Government he is in effect but Magni nominis umbra And as to the other That the King Lords and Commons as one Corporation and no otherwise are the Law-giver here I take the King to be in a worse condition for tho to the making of an Act the concurrence of both Houses is necessary yet of no effect if the King disapprove yet the Case of a Mayor Aldermen and Burgesses or whatever other the stile of the Corporation be is wholly different for they meeting together by the Princes grant in a kind of Democratical Common Council for the better Government of the place where they reside order every thing by most Voices wherein the Mayor himself has but one and is concluded by the greater number but the King having no Voice nor any one to represent him in the discussive part of any Act cannot be said to give his Royal Assent as one of the Corporation but by his inherent Legislative Prerogative and how improper the contrary is will further appear in that a Common-Council put what by-By-Laws they please upon the Mayor as long as they are not contrary to the Law of the Land because he has no negative upon them But in case of a Sovereign the first mark of it as I have shewn before is the Power of making Laws now who should those Subjects be that should yield Obedience to that Law if they also had the Power to make Laws or who should that Prince be that could give the Law being himself constrain'd to receive it of his Subjects unto whom also he gave it A thing not only incompatible but even absurd from every days Practice and Experience for do not the Three Estates of this Kingdom upon the passing of all Bills address themselves to his Majesty in the most humble Stile As that of the Petition of Right Humbly shew unto our Sovereign Lord the King the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in Parliament Assembled c. So to King James Most dread and most gracious Sovereign We your most Loyal and Humble Subjects the Lords c. So to Queen
where directing us to our Duty As 1. Negatively in that we are commanded not to think ill of the King Curse not the King no not in thy thoughts much less then may we speak it Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy people Least of all may we do him hurt Touch not mine Anointed 2. Affirmatively We are commanded to keep his Commandments and that in regard of the Oath of God Neither may we give him any just cause of anger Whoso provoketh him to it sinneth against his own soul. To which if any one shall say they were Kings themselves that spake it and 't were much they could say nothing in their own behalf I answer That besides that it has been ever receiv'd for Holy Writ Job who wrote many Centuries before there was any King in Israel puts the question Is it fit saith he to say to a King thou art wicked or to Princes ye are ungodly The Interrogation is affirmative and after the manner of affirmative Interrogations concludes negatively i. e. No it is not fit for says the same Eccles. which is another of the same who may say unto him What do'st thou To which also if it be yet objected that this Law was given to a peculiar People and that no Law but the Law of Nature which is immutable obliges any to whom it was not given I answer as before besides that it is Holy Writ what inconvenience is it if we give the same credit to God Almighty we generally allow to other Law-givers and the rather in that God is not the God of the Jews only but the Gentiles also That Reverence the Jews paid their Kings by a Written Law the Ancient Heathens took up from a mere impulse of Nature and yet what the manner of their Kingdoms were in that the Jews did but desire to be like all other Nations you have had before Q. Curtius tells us that the Persians had such a love to their King that Alexander could not persuade them either for fear or reward to tell him whither their King had fled or reveal any of his intentions In like manner when Xerxes fled from Greece in a small Vessel so full of men that it was impossible for him to be sav'd without throwing some over-board the Nobility leapt into the Sea and by their example others till the Ship was lightned and the King preserv'd And so Boëmus Aubanus speaking of the Aegyptian Kings saith that they had so much love from their People Ut non solum sacerdotibus sed etiam singulis Aegyptiis major Regis quam uxorum filiorumque salutis inesset cura That not only the Priests but every one of them had a greater care of the Kings safety than of their Wives and Children And in another place speaking of the Tartars Albeit their King saith he upon his Inauguration tells them Oris mei sermo gladius meus erit My word 's my Sword and that all things are in his power and no man may dwell in any part of the Land but what is assign'd him by the King yet nemini licet imperatoris veâ—ba mutare nemini latae ab illo sententiae qualicunque modo contraire No man may alter his Decree or in the least tittle dispute his Commands Besides all which the obsequious impiety of elder times attributed the name of God to their Emperors and whence perhaps it might be that Joseph swore By the life of Pharaoh Sceptrum capitisque salutem Testatur And the Romans By the Majesty and Genius of the Emperor And the drinking his Health at Publick Feasts was decreed to Augustus as we have it in Peter Ursinus his Appendix where also he cites S. Ambrose speaking of the custom of his time Bibamus inquiunt pro salute Imperatorum qui non biberit sit reus in devotione Let us drink say they the Emperors Health and let him be damn'd that refuses it in which the Father taxes not the thing but their ill of doing it In the offering of all which let me not be mistaken as if I design'd to insinuate that such a Power as those Kings I so lately mentioned did exercise might be practicable now or any municipal Law alter'd ad libitum no that were to justifie that Arbitrary Power so often talkt of and against which our present King hath so publickly declar'd the absolute and unlimited Sovereignty which they have by the Ordinance of God having from time to time by their Bounty been limited and bounded in the ordinary exercise thereof by such Laws and Customs as themselves have given the Royal Assent unto and allowed so that in effect it may be said What have we that we have not received Upon which score it is that a Subject may maintain his Right and Property and have Judgment against the King and in such cases the Judges are bound to right the party according to Law And there are many things also of which it is said The King cannot do them i. e. because he will not do them quia refragantur ordini as being contrary to the Law and Order establish'd in his Realm And therefore neither can our Kings or ought they in common justice to be esteem'd or thought the less when they have scatter'd any Flowers of their Crown on their Subjects in asmuch as the root rests in the same place and is as productive of more when deserved But suppose may some say the King be a wicked King a Tyrant an Idolater or however else the licentiousness of an enrag'd Rabble may render him may not the subordinate Magistrate the Nobility or People restrain or remove him I answer No for besides that the Precepts of Obedience to Kings are without restriction and therefore extend to all Kings be they what they will if it be not lawful for me to judg another man's Servant how much less then my own Master whose Power over me is just tho it may so happen that he use it unjustly The Israelites had a sharp bondage under the Egyptians and wanted not numbers to have made their party good The Land was filled with them and Pharaoh confesseth them the more mighty yet they thought it better to quit the Country than rebel Nor was their condition much improv'd in Babylon and yet they are commanded to offer Sacrifices and pray for the Life of the King and of his Sons and to seek the peace of the City where they were Captives Samuel pronounced the rejection of Saul whom also David afterward spar'd yet neither incited the People to rebel against him Nebuchadnezzar Achab Manasses were Idolatrous Kings and yet Daniel Elias and the Holy men of those times continu'd their Obedience and tamper'd not with others to infringe theirs What shall I add our Saviour commands us to give unto Caesar the things that are Caesars and the Apostle who exhorts
impunity and how much it was improv'd for the better in our late times among our selves I appeal to the yet calamitous remembrance of it when every man did what was best his own eyes and for the same reason also There was no King in Israel And now who would not rather wish a Tyranny than an Aristocracy or Democracy for as many wise skilful Pilots hinder one another in striving to govern the Helm so will many men of what condition wisdom or virtue soever they may be when every one shall seek to govern the Common-wealth according to the vain images of his own fancy or abus'd imagination In short in the multitude of Counsellors there is wisdom but the determinative part is better performed by one who having digested their opinions will the readier execute that which the other would scarce resolve on without contention it being the nature of Ambition rather to see all lost than admit another wiser than it self or hazard the disrepute of changing its opinion But to proceed and here not to weary my Reader with the state of Athens under the thirty Tyrants or the Lacedemonians under their Ephori who tho they carried the specious shew of restraining their Kings were indeed a scourge and plague to the people I shall only insist on the Romans whose infancy for about 250 years for so Florus reckons it was under Kings And to the same purpose Tacitus Urbem Roman à Principio Reges habuere After this upon expulsion of the Tarquins they set up two Consuls but not satisfied with this also the people take Arms and leaving the City declare they will not return unless there be appointed some Tribunes of the People who might bridle the Disorders of the Consuls and the wealthier sort and 't is granted nor would this yet satisfie they must now know what the Law was and to that end it must be written in twelve Tables for the doing of which the Consuls were laid by and the Decemviri created with the Power quam modo Consules olim Reges habuissent interim cessare omnes magistratus alios donec juxta leges creati fuerint but they as says the same Author having made an agreement among themselves and bound it with an Oath that no one should oppose another but what was approv'd by one should be approv'd by all that they would admit no other to be joyn'd to them but hold an equal Authority among themselves Maximamque partem rerum pro imperio multa tyrannice agerent the People took Arms again and wholly destroy'd their power and as saith Florus laid their persons in chains the third year from the time they were first set up and thereupon the Consuls were again restor'd Add to this the several Seditions of Tiberius Gracchus slain by Scipio Nascica that other of his Brother Caius slain by the Consul Opimius A third of Appuleius Saturninus suppress'd by Marius and that other of Livius Drusus by Philippus the Consul As also the bloody outrages between Marius and Cinna against Sylla of which last not to excuse either of the former Plutarch says that he had slain 100000 men 90 Senators 15 of Consular Dignity and 2000 Gentlemen And touching Marius that of Ovid may not improperly be applied Ausus è media plebe sedere Deus Yet all this will be little more than the beginnings of evil if we consider that Monster of three heads for so those times call'd it viz. Crassus Caesar and Pompey the first was wealthy even to a Proverb Crasso divitior and yet still gaping for more the second was for bringing himself into Estimation and Authority and the latter for keeping what he had already gotten all were alike greedy of Power and therefore no wonder if they so easily agreed for invading the Common-wealth Caesar takes upon him Gaul Crassus Asia and Pompey Spain This rope of Sand held together for 10 years and such I call it for Crassus being slain in Parthia and there wanting a third to ballance the other two they quickly broke asunder Pompey begins to suspect Caesar's Wealth and Caesar casts an ill eye on Pompey's new Authority Nec hic ferebat parem nec ille superiorem Nefas Sic de Principatu laborabant tanquam duos tanta imperii fortuna non caperet The one brook'd not an Equal nor the other a Superior Impossible they made such work who should be Chief as if the fortune of so great an Empire were too little for two In short they made such havock between them that any one region of the world was too little to contain it and therefore it spread thro the whole for Pompey having the ill fate of surviving his Dignity in the loss of his Army at Pharsalia and to be as treacherously murdered by his friend Ptolomy King of Alexandria to whom he had fled for succor his Sons took up the quarrel of whom Cnaeus the younger flying wounded from the Battle of Munda in Spain was pursued by Caesar and slain from which Sextus the elder escaping and having gotten together 350 Ships he was after the death of Caesar overthrown in a Sea-fight near Sicily whence flying into Asia he fell into Anthony's hands and was there slain of which Martial Pompeios juvenes Asia atque Europa sed ipsum Terra tegit Libyes si tamen ulla tegit Quid mirum toto si spargitur orbe jacere Uno non poterat tanta ruina loco And now every thing following the good fortune of Caesar it was not said to the Senate And will ye be last to bring the Conqueror home No they prevented it for besides the bringing his Statues into their Temples inscribing a month of the year to him c. they met their Enemy in the way and having new studded the word Imperator welcom'd him in with the supernumerary Titles of Pater Patriae Consul in decennium Dictator in perpetuum Sacrosanctus Imperator But O the uncertainty of human condition deprav'd natures are never reconcil'd and such those his Flatterers prov'd to him for upon a Conspiracy of Brutus and Cassius and other Senators he was murder'd in the Senate they not longer nevertheless surviving it themselves than in the effects of that Parricide to have beheld that liberty lost they had made such bustle to restore And here again Rome found the want of a Head for Sextus Pompeius having as I said before set up at Sea to recover what his Father had lost by Land and failing in it Octavius must be reveng'd of the murderers of Caesar who had adopted him Antony of them who had declar'd him an enemy and Lepidus whose only business in hopes of Wealth was to fish in troubled waters comes in as fuel to a flame and joyning with Octavius and Antony they made a Triumvirate and under the common pretences of revenging the murder of Julius Caesar and
increase of Families Esau. Gen. 36 Gen. 14. Josh. 12. The Assyrian Monarchy The Persian The Grecian The Roman Monarchy All other ancient Nations Monarchies Bodin Selden's Tit. Hon. 10. And as universally received by the Moderns Precedent to all other Governments Arist. pol. l. 4 Lord Baeon The several Forms of Government Arist. Pol. l. 3. c. 5. And their Rotations Discourse on Livy Deca 1. Aristocracy Democracy Virgil. Ovid. Metam Tyranny to be rather wisht than either Examples in Athens c. Florus l. 1. Tacitus l. 1. Rome from the first Consulate Florus l. 1. c. 23. Their Tribunes Rosiâ— Antiq. l. 7. c. 19. Lib. 1. c. 24. Id. l 3. c. 14 15 16 17. Several Seditions Marius and Sylla In vita Syllae Fastorum l. 4. Crassus Caesar Pompey The two latter divide Flo. l. 4. c 4. Ibid. cap. 8. Lib. â— Ep. 75. Caesar complemented to Rome by the Senate God Rom. Ant. 171. Flo. l. 4. c. 7. The Triumvirate Rofin Antiq. l. 7. c. 21. Their Proscriptions Rosin Antiq. l. 7. c. 21. And Breach No peace until Monarchy restor'd Florus l. 4. c. 12. The sense of those times touching this matter Amp. in lib. memoriali c. 28. Lucan Statius 1 Sam. 8. throughout 1 Sam. 10.25 1 Sam. 8.20 1 Kings 2.27 1 Kings 25.34 Object Sol. Deut. 17.15 Judges 9.18 1 Kings 12.3 Inst. 4 343. Seld. Tit. Hon. 24. Marks of Sovereignty Power of making Laws Psal. 60.7 Virgil. Livy Psal. 114.1 And exemption from any coactive Obedience to them Joseph Ant. l. 15. c. 14. Panegyr ad Trajan Power of Peace and War De Repub. 163. Id. Bodin 182. That the Kingdom of England is a Supreme Imperial Monarchy The Kings Power in making Laws In his Resusc. fol. 153. Ibid. 154. Ibid. fol. 276 Sir E. Coke's Preface to his third Report Sir Jo. Davys Preface to his Irish Reports 36 Edw. III. cap. 15. Sir Jo. Davys Preface to his Irish Reports Sir E. Cooke Sur West 2. Inst. 4.243 Inst. 2.286 Indictment against the Earl of Areyle 1681. The Kings Power in interpreting Laws Cited by him in his Postnaci Sir H. Spelman's Gloss fol. 107. Inst. 1.99 Inst. 2.168 Vide Petition of Right and his Majesties Answer 3 Car. 1. Vide Stat. at large fol. 1433. His being exempt from their coactive force Inst. 1.99 Ibid. 73. Ibid. 110. Inst. 4.28 Ibid. 46. â—ract l. 1. c. 8. 1 Jac. Claudian The Kings absolute Power of Peace and War Nat. Brev. 113. Ess. of Delay Inst. 3.9 25 Edw. 3.2 7 Rep. 25. 13th of this King cap. 2. Sir E. Cooke Inst. 1.90 * Subscribed to by all the Judges in the case of Ship-Money and by Hatten and Crooke tho they fell off afterward Sir Will. Dugdale's Short View fol. 42. Inst. 1.161 The Kings Power in appointing chief Magistrates and great Ministers Smith de Repub. Ang. l. 2. Inst. 2.26 Inst. 3.7 The Power of the last Appeal Inst. 4.343 Ibid. 341. Matth. Paris cited by Sir J. Davys in his Irish Rep. 61. Answer to Petit. p. 88. Ass. de Clarend 10 H. 2. c. 8. Inst. 4.14 16 R. 2. c. 5. Vide The Case of Premunire in Sir John Davys Inst. 4.341 Inst. 2.602 Sir H. Hobart fol. 146. The sole fountain of Honor Inst. 4.126 Inst. 1.65 Inst. 4.363 Seld. Tit. of Honor 621. Ibid. 628. Ibid. 630. Inst. 1.69 May create a Palatinate Camb. Britt 464. Seld. Tit. Hon. 530. Inst. 4.211 Camb. Britt 600. Plowd 214. Inst. 4.204 in the Margin 9 Jac. in Scac. fol. 49. As also Seld. Tit. Hon. 693. Stat. Hibern 14 Car. 2. c. 20. Have made a King and Lord of Ireland Seld. Tit. Hon. 38.41 Inst. 4.357 Inst. 1.83 Ibid. Seld. 26. Sir E. Cooke 5 Rep. 110. in Foxley's Case Inst. 3.233 241. The King appoints the value c. of Coin Sir J. Davys q. v. Case de mixt Moneys Stat. 25 Edw. 3. cap. 2. Sir J. Davys in Pref. 5. Rep. 114. Inst. 2.576 Inst. 1.207 Liege Homage received by our Kings Seld. Tit. Hon. 26. Ibid. 29. Ibid. 24 25.38 Inst. 3.11 Their burning those incommunicable Titles of Majesty c. Tit. Hon. 594. Ibid. 92. Further instances of the Kings Sovereignty by the Common Law Inst. 1.1 Inst. 2.68 Inst. 1.13 Ibid. 42. Inst. 1.15 1 H. 7.4 Plowd 238. Inst. 4.352 Inst. 3 7. 7. Rep. in Calvin's Case Ibidem 23 H. 6. c. 8. 11. Rep. of the Lord De la Ware 13 Edw. 3. Inst. 4.342 Vide Seld. Tit. Hon. 21. Ann. Reg. 14. Ann. 40. Ed. 3. Inst. 4.13 357. 18 Edw. 3. Inst. 4.88 104. Inst. 2.167 Inst. 1.90 344. Inst. 2.496 Bract. l. 1. Britt f. 27. Regist. fol. 61. 1 Sam. 6.19 The like from the Statute-Law and that the Crown of England is Imperial Inst. 4.343 16 R. 2. c. 5. Vide Article against Woolsey 21 H. 8. Iâ—st 4.89 24 H. 8. c. 12. 25 H. 8. c. 21. Vide Cap. 22. 88 H. 8. c. 7. Vide cap. 16. Stat. Hibern 28. H. 8. c. 2. Stat. Hibern 33 H. 8. c. 1. 1 Eliz. c. 1. and Cap. 3. 5 Eliz. c. 1. 1 Jac. c. 1. Stat. Scotiae 5. Jac. 3. c. 3. Printed at Edenburgh 1681. The Kings Power in Ecclesiasticks Sir H. Hob. 143. Inst. 1.94 Glanv l. 1. c. 7. Inst. 4.285 Inst. 1.134 344. Ann. Reg. 17. Math. Paris fol. 213. Answ. to Pet. fol. 88. 40 Edw. 3. The Act is not in the Statutes at large but you may find it Inst. 4.13 Ibid. 357. 25 H. 8. c. 2. This was set out by Dr. Bernard in 16 1. in a Book entituled Clavi Trabales with the Bishop of Lincoln's Preface to it p. 82. Inst. 4.357 Ibid. 359. Regist. 294. Fitz. N. Breâ— Printed in 1666. 411. 6 Edw. 3.11 11 H. 4.68 11 H 4.60 11 H. 7.12 Sir Hen. Hob. fol. 146. Inst. 3.238 Fitz. N.B. 662. Inst. 1.344 Dyer 348. Ibid. 294. The same 3 Car. 1 c. 4. Inst. 4.342 Inter Leges Ed. c. 17. Mr. Hooker of the Kings Power in matters of Religion Cla. Trab 72. Inst. 4.323 Cro. Jac. 371. 22 Car. 2. That the Kings of England have justly used the Titles of Emperor c. and that from Ancient Ages Seld. Tit. of Honor f. 17. Sir Edw. Coke's Preface to his fourth Report Camb. Brit. 189. Ibid. Seld. Inst. 4.343 Ibidem Ibid Seld. 1 Object 1. Object 2. Sol. 1. Bodin l. 2. Ibid. Bodin Sol. 2. The manner of the Three Estates applying to the King 3 Car. 1. 1 Jac. 1. 1 Eliz. 3. 1 Mar. Sess. 2. 28 H. 8. c. 7. 1 Rich. 3. 3 Edw. 4. 4 Edw. 3. â—5 Edw. 3. 1 Edw. 1. Stat de Scat. 51 H. 3. What these Three Estates are Inst. 4.1 Inst. 1.110 Lib. 5.233 De Repub. l. 1. Coll. Fr. Tâ—â—ffe his Speech to them â—rom the Duke of Lorain 1674. Sir H. Spelm. Gloss. f. 449. 1 Pet. 2.13 To presume him such were to make him but a Co-ordinate Power Bar. Arg. l. 1. He cannot Summon himself Novum Organ Aphor. 46. Where were these three Estates