Selected quad for the lemma: law_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A52984
|
A modest censure of the immodest letter to a dissenter, upon occasion of His Majesty's late gracious declaration for liberty of conscience by T.N. a true member of the Church of England.
|
T. N., True member of the Church of England.; T. N., True member of the Church of England.
|
1687
(1687)
|
Wing N76; ESTC R10204
|
21,456
|
25
|
he has set to his Good Breeding and to throw away their present Advantages and to stay for the Liberty of the public Exercise of their Religion till the Parliament allow it them and to satisfie themselves with those imaginary Advantages of which they can hardly fail in the next probable Revolution if by an unseasonable Activity they lose not the Influence of their good Star which promises them every thing that is prosperous for that all things seem to conspire to their Ease and Satisfaction if by too much haste to anticipate their good Fortune they do not destroy it Such a prevailing Eloquence as this would speak him an Orator beyond compare and would give us cause to conclude by the Effect it had upon them that the Dissenters had not yet been so long restrain'd from their Liberty as to have any strong Appetite to enjoy it again but the Indians I believe may as soon catch Monkies with a Mousetrap as he can draw in the Dissenters with such a dull Device as this to destroy themselves by using their Interest against the Establishment of that Happiness by a Law which his Majesties Clemency hath already Indulg'd them For this purpose pag. 8. he insinuates the Irregularity of the Declaration in point of Law which whether it be so or no is certainly not so fit to be determin'd in a Pamphlet as in Westminster-Hall which already hath given its Opinion in favor of the Prerogative And after that it is methinks no small Presumption to Censure the King's Actions as irregularly done which proceed upon such special Verdict for their Legality As the King do's not need the Dissenters Thanks to justifie his Declaration in point of Law so neither do the Papists doubt of the Legality of his Power of Dispensing with them for his Time but they desire to have the Royal Favor made more lasting to them by a Law. Besides is it not very strange that Men should generally acknowledge the King a Right to Dispense with Penal Laws against Theft and Murder which are founded upon a Divine Sanction yet question his Right to Dispense with those against a Conventicle which can make no such Pretences Or that this should lay a Foundation for the breach of all Laws so saith this Writer pag. 9. and that should not Or that Dissenters should look like Council Retain'd against Magna Charta for thankfully receiving the Benefit of this and Felons never be so Censur'd for that But if as he presumes to affirm the Declaration be irregular it 's not a little difficult to comprehend how this becomes an Argument against Endeavoring to have the Liberty granted by it Confirm'd by a Law since the Invalidity of their present Grant should in all reason make them more sollicitous for such a Confirmation as may preserve the Liberty they are so desirous to enjoy His Arguments to me seem very weak against this mighty Power of Dispensing which needs not the Justification of a Parliament tho' the Penal Laws and Test want their Repeal which I hope they may have in good time without endangering or destroying our Religion or Properties But our Author thinks this a proper time to put the Prerogative in Pickle for some other Generation that can better digest it than the present and in pursuance of his Designs he makes the Laws spurn against their Maker which is not the way to secure our Religion but to make our Church the more odious by practising that which she professes to abhor She has taught her Sons to believe that no Power on Earth can give Licence for the doing of that which is Malum in se an Offence in its own nature and so declar'd by the Divine Law but that Malum prohibitum which in its own nature is indifferent and becomes an Offence only because some Law of the Land makes it so she thinks may be dispensed with according to the King's Discretion whom she allows to be the proper Judge of Public Necessity 'T is impossible for Human Law-makers who have no pretence to Infallibility or a perpetual Divine Assistance to foresee all particular Accidents Mischiefs and Inconveniences which may happen in particular Circumstances by or from the making of any particular Law And therefore there must be some Power always visible and in being to Suspend or Dispense with such Laws as the Public Good and Safety of the People or an emergent Necessity requires which is by Law in the King who is the Head of the Public Good and the Fountain of Justice and Mercy which Power is so united to his Royal Person that he cannot transfer give away or separate the same from himself as all the Judges of England resolv'd Lord Coke lib. 7. fol. 36. nor can he bar himself from that which is so inherent in him and inseparably annex'd to his Royal Person no not by an Act of Parliament for by so doing he would cease to be King Coke lib. 7. pag. 14. the most he can do is only to agree that he will not use that Right but in extraordinary Cases and Occasions when in his Princely Wisdom he shall find it necessary for the Public Good Nor is his reassuming to Exercise such a Right any Breach of his Promise or Oath at his Coronation but a making use of that Condition imply'd in his Agreement as to such particular Cases and such present Circumstances The King cannot Repeal and totally make void the Law by his own single Power without a Parliament but Relax Suspend and Control it for a time with respect to the Advantages or Necessities of his People he may which is a temporary Repeal or the laying the Law down to sleep for a time in a legal way which is a sufficient Discharge to them who are Commission'd under him and by his Authority to put them in Execution Our Author knows that the strict keeping of Lent is enforced by great Penalties in our Laws viz. 2 3 Ed. 6. cap. 19. 6 Ed. 6. cap. 33. 5 Eliz. 5. and yet that the King was never question'd the Power of Dispensing with them all either by Judges Bishops or Parliament but his Power in these Points has had an universal Admittance with a Nemine contradicente and why then should it be arraign'd only in Dispensing with those Penal Laws relating to Religion against Conventicles or Recusants In his next Attempt he seems to imitate the last and desperate Shift of the King of Moab when he took his eldest Son that should have Reign'd in his stead and offer'd him a Burnt-offering upon the Wall to move the Israelites by that Instance of his Misery and Desperation to pity him 2 Kings 3.27 For to move the Dissenters Compassion he sacrifices the Reputation of his own Mother the Church of England confessing pag. 10. that she out of revenge for the rough usage she met with from the Dissenters in the time of their Reign upon the late King's Restauration made the Penal Laws against them