there is no Law to be found that contradicts and therefore 't is to be supposed that an Argument drawn from those two Statutes of Edw. 3. being an Argument ex Consequenti that is an Argument grounded upon Consequence the Consequence if good ought to be derived from a right interpretation of those Statutes Now the decision of the matter rests onely upon this Which of the two Parties Judgements you will rely upon as most likely to make right interpretation of the Statutes whether upon our Author's Judgment and his Fellows who appear to be parties concerned in a present Factious designe and season or upon the Judgment of the Queen's Parliament which sat in a more Happie Season who doubtless could not be ignorant of those Statutes but neither they nor any Parliament or Person since that yeer of the Queen ever found fault with her Prorogation as illegal which it 's to be believed would have been done before this time if that Parliament or any succeeding Parliament or Lawyer or other person before the time of the late Prorogation had apprehended the Queen to be faulty in hers Therefore 't is to be supposed that this Precedent of Prorogation made by that most excellent Princess is a good one and that the Interpretation of those Statutes made by this Author and his Fellows to serve a Faction towards the ruine of this Parliament is the wrong Moreover if the sence of those Statutes be taken as they would have it viz. That no Parliament ought to sit above a yeer but a new one to be called within the yeer why were not those Statutes made use of before in Fifteen yeers time to condemn the sitting of this It is strange that no notable Lawyer should in all that time affirm the illegality of it But that onely some few Scarabees of the Law should now to bolster up a Faction be scribling their sence upon the Statutes when the ablest have been and are silent is ridiculous Besides Fourthly consider that when his Majesty now Regnant did in the 16 yeer of his Reign Enact That the Triennial Act passed by his Royal Father in his 16th yeer should be Repealed for Reasons in that Act of Repeal expressed yet upon the humble Supplication of the Lords and Commons He did Declare That hereafter the sitting and holding of Parliaments shall not be intermitted or discontinued above three yeers at the most And that within three yeers after the determination of this present Parliament and so from time to time within three yeers after the determination of any other Parliament or Parliaments or if there be occasion more often your Majestie your Heirs and Successors do issue out your Writs for calling assembling and holding of another Parliament to the end there may be a frequent calling assembling and holding of Parliaments once in three yeers at the least From which I collect these ensuing Particulars 1. That by the word Three yeers after the determination of this present Parliament it is implied by the Act that the duration of this Parliament shall not be comprehended within any determinate time and there was reason for it because they had a tedious work to do to repair the Ruines of three Kingdoms wasted and unsetled by a long Civil War 2. This appears farther by the subsequent words which shew that the determinate Course of Parliaments set by the Act is meant onely for the future after the Dissolution of this 3. The Parliament had been sitting four yeers when they form'd this Act and therefore though they in the Act made mention of the two old Statutes of Edward the Third for holding a Parliament every yeer yet it seems they did not then in their virgin-days conceive themselves to be within the breach of those Statutes for sitting above a yeer because they were upon the making of this Act which doubtless so many learned men as are in these honourable Houses would never have presumed to do if their Sitting had by Law been limited to but a yeers time for then they could not but have apprehended that the Laws they made in the three yeers before must have been null and void for want of legal power to make them as well as all the Laws that they should make afterward till this day And what must the miserable Consequence of that have been even to demolish all the new Foundations which had been or were to be laid for the Restauration and Establishment of the Crown Church and State in case the validity of their former Sitting and Acting had been questionable as they would have been by such bold Interpreters of Law as I shall further make them appear to be who presume to advance their own Understandings above the Judgement of whole Bodies of Parliaments which these men have done and do by Printed Books scattered like Wild-fire about the three Nations to set all in Combustion But Fifthly what if it should appear a more considerable Question to be put Whether those two Old Statutes of Edward the Third be not of most force for the King And truely there appears good reason to conclude in the Affirmative The two Statutes may stand as declarative Memorials of the Judgement of Parliament in time past for the Peoples having a right to a frequencie of Parliaments if need require and no farther but it is not to be believed that so Victorious and Potent a King as Edward the Third ever would have passed those two Acts if his Parliaments meaning had been to cut off that main Point of his Prerogative Royal viz. the power of judging when 't is fit or needful to call a Parliament and when not Nor is it at all likely that it was the Opinion of that Age that the King had done so in passing those Acts but 't is rather to be supposed that that Parliament meant no more than this That those Statutes were intended to be declarative of the Common Law and of the People's having Right by antient Custom to Parliaments and that as they had been so they should also be yeerly in the future if judged necessary For I would know of any man of an impartial Judgment how it is possible to skrue out of those Statutes any other Meaning seeing the words if need be are words Hypothetical or Conditional viz. supposing there be need or upon Condition there be need Hereby 't is implied that if in a yeers time there be no need there is no obligation by Law from hence for the calling a Parliament always within the yeer The Sum of all then is this That if no need be he need not call one And who I pray you ought to be judge of this need but the King who is to Call But what saith our Author of the Considerations to this He hereupon turns Statute-Expositor and Objector as followeth CONSIDERATOR He saith this meaning of the Law is but a Phansie all our Properties Rights and Liberties are bound up in those LAWS of Annual Parliaments and
Bottom he and the rest of them do build their Argumentations and the high-flown flourishes of discourse which they so diligently Print and spread abroad to deceive the weaker unwary People and intoxicate them with disaffection to this Parliament and to the lawful Prerogative and Government of His Majesty But if they can make no better Squibs than this to blow up a Parliament they had best give it over for the King not being bound up by Law within a yeer he is at liberty to Prorogue beyond the limit of a yeer and so the Fifteen Months Prorogation was and is good though it hath been seldom that there have been so long Prorogations For that is no Argument against the Wisdom and Power of the King to exceed some days or months if He seeth in prudence it be pro bono Publico and that urgent Reasons of State do require it and there is nothing in all our Law that speaks a syllable to the contrary if rightly consider'd Therefore to unwinde the Bottom which the Dissolver hath entangled let me with assurance determine this Point which is the Standard by which you may measure all that they have said or can say If those two Statutes did not confine the Parliament's sitting to Twelve months then the Kings Proroguing His Parliament to Fifteen months was no violation of the said Statutes If no Statute be thereby violated then the Prorogation was and is good If so then the Parliament is as firm in Being as ever any Prorogued Parliament was or can be and consequently the Laws which they have made or shall make after the Prorogation are as perfect and obligatory upon us as any other Laws that ever were made in this Nation And 't is no question a Crime little less than an endeavour at the Subversion of Parliament for any persons by Speeches or Prints in or out of the Houses to carry on a Designe of arguing a Dissolution of this thereby to perswade the People against Obedience and Submission to it Nor can this Assertion of mine be construed as if I maintained any thing in derogation of that Freedom of speech which ought to be had in Parliament and which I count absolutely necessary for the Debate and the Dispatch of the Grand Affairs But then that freedom of speech ought to be qualified with so much Modesty and Reverence as not to run to such licentious discourse as the Laws make Criminal for next to downright Treasonous discourse none can be worse than that which tends to the Violent Dissolution of a Parliament that is to say without the King's consent or against His will What then do they deserve who have been such busie Speech-makers both in and out of Parliament to bring that End about against the King's consent and against the Laws Or that shall presume to do it hereafter seeing the two Houses have given their Judgment in the Case contrary to the interpretation of all Factious Penmen and Talkers But the Dissolver goes further than this and takes upon himself the person of the People of England and in their Name falls to downright threatning of both Houses of Parliament in the following words DISSOLVER Pages 9 and 10. This we say not Gentlemen by way of acknowledgment that you are in a Legal capacity now to do us either good or hurt for your day is done and your power expired but that you may not like a Snuff smell ill after you are out For the reason why we more particularly direct our selves to you is because of the Character you have born that therefore you should not seem so much as to give Prerogative the upper hand of the Law That so however you have lived yet all may say and witness for you that you died well and made a worthy End If not we hope the whole Nation will strictly observe every man among you that to sit a little longer yet would sacrifice to this Prorogation the very best of Laws and in them all the Laws and Liberties of England The two Statutes of EDW. 3. were declared to be in force by your Selves in the Sixteenth yeer of the King in the new Triennial Act then passed and we are sure there hath been no new Parliament since to Repeal them ANIMADVERSION What need this phrentick impertinent Clause here at last seeing that no man affirms those two Statutes to be Repealed Let them stand for ever as Laws to shew that as we had and have a Right to a frequencie of Parliaments so also that the King hath a Right of Prerogative to judge whether there be need of having them so often as every yeer And thus much is to be understood also by the tenour of the new Triennial Act passed by this Parliament to prevent Inconveniences hapning by the long intermission of Parliaments for they name the two Statutes of Edward the Third but make no mention of a Right to Parliaments once every yeer the words of the Act referring to those Statutes being these onely because by them Parliaments are to be held very often which is the very same that I grant and affirm to be the meaning of the said Statutes and their not affirming a jot more than I do implieth that they understood them no otherwise than I do in general terms for a Declarative Frequencie but whether within a yeer or oftner they say not a word touching which it is to be presumed they would not have been silent if they had understood it to be the Right of the People to have had certain Parliaments yeerly whenas the Statutes declare not absolutely but onely with condition IF NEED BE. And because all mouthes should be stopped and no room left for an Objection which ill-minded heads or jealous may make and is made use of by these our Factious Book-makers viz. that our having of Parliaments is by this means left to the King's pleasure when he please to judge them needful behold there is no reason for such objecting because the nature of His power to judge I maintain not to be absolute whether we shall have Parliaments or not but whether it be needful to have one or more so oft as within every yeer Therefore the high Wisdom of this present Parliament is to be magnisied in contriving that new Triennial Act in such a manner as prevents all the frivolous Objections that may be made by any other persons For in the later end of the Act they pray in these words That it may be Declared and Enacted And be it Declared and Enacted by the Authority aforesaid That hereafter the Sitting and Holding of Parliaments shall not be intermitted or discontinued above Three years at the most but that within Three yeers after the determination of this present Parliament and so from time to time within Three yeers after the determination of any other Parliament or Parliaments OR IF THERE BE OCCASION MORE OFTEN your Majestie your Heirs and Successors do issue out your Writs for Calling Assembling
and Holding of another Parliament to the end there may be a frequent Calling Assembling and Holding of Parliaments once in Three yeers at the least What can be desired more than this Act hath provided for We have by it secured a Parliament every Three years after this is ended which is more than ever you had before And if you will not be contented with my Sence in expounding the Two Statutes of Edward the Third take here the sence and judgment of the whole Parliament They have Provided also for yeerly Parliaments or oftner in these words IF THERE BE OCCASION as fully as Edward the Third did by the words IF NEED BE in those ancient Statutes the Prerogative of the King being left here entire to judge whether there be OCCASION as it was in the former Statutes to judge whether there be NEED of Parliaments every yeer or not And so you see 't is the sence of this Parliament declared in their First days of Sitting many yeers ago that no more than this was meant by the Parliament of King Edward Behold also how great the Wisdom Concession and Tenderness of His Majestie hath been towards us in this Particular that to remove all Fears and Jealousies which Seditious men plant and nourish in the mindes of weak people about His possible Delaying of Parliaments long He did so graciously concur with his Parliament in the said Triennial Act to secure us in the Golden mean as I once before told you betwixt the having too frequent or too few Parliaments in time to come Most ungrateful then are they and most malicious and the Peoples greatest Enemies who by their dark desperate Contrivances have so many yeers been casting Rubs in the way of this Parliament to interrupt and impede the Noble Work of Settlement which is most likely to be done by them or by none and had not the Faction hindred it had been done long ago so that we might ere now have seen Parliaments in motion upon this fair Wheel of a well-ordered Succession Judge then I pray you how little cause this Clamorous unreasonable Dissolver hath to revile this most Loyal honourable House of Commons or impute to them a sacrificing of our Rights and Liberties which every days transaction shews when they are sitting they do most studiously maintain Whereas if he and his Fellow-Dissolvers might have their Ends to put an end to their Sitting before they have done their Work it would by experience be soon found the onely way to run us out into Anarchy and that they have been the onely Bank that kept out the great Floud of endless Contests and Confusions which unavoidably would follow a present Dissolution I could without the help of a spirit of Prophecie give an account of all beforehand had I time or room to tell you the Story But now 't is time to behold the DISSOLVER's Threatnings He tells the House The whole Nation will strictly observe every man among them that to sit a little longer doth sacrifice to the late Prorogation made in 1675. But this is not all He proceeds further in more plain terms as followeth page 10 and 16. DISSOLVER Do not think to salve your Authority by your own Vote for We that is the men of Shaftsbury the Faction must tell you that no Parliament which is not antecedently so can make it self a Parliament by Vote Do not think the People of England will do that indignity to their Laws that dishonour to the Finger of God which by so stupendious and over-ruling Providence hath Dissolved you or that disservice to their own Interest as ever to acknowledge you any more for their Representative And pag. 17. Wherefore unless you will stand upon Record as Oppressors of all the People of England c. And a little after he saith thus It is onely your single fear that the People will not chuse you again that can make you do so and so because you doubt they will credit you no more for opposing the Interest of the People is never the way to be chosen again And page 18. Pray you saith he remember the former long Parliament how the People unroosted them and took vengeance upon them their Lives their Liberties and the Fortunes of most of them And pag. 19. he addes Let not the vain perswasion delude you that no Precedent can be found that one English Parliament hath hang'd up another c. An unprecedented Crime calls for an unprecedented Punishment and we faithfully promise we will use our utmost endeavours when a new Parliament shall be called to chuse such as shall c. and so forth ANIMADVERSION Hold hold SIR what d' ye mean you 'll crack the Strings by and by which should hang Us. What shall we have next A Switzerland-Reformation Must the Nobility and Gentry of this Parliament all to the Pot when these Reformers can get a New one And for no other cause but sitting longer than those our New Masters that wou'd be would have ' em See how furiously the Faction would ride if they could get into the Saddle but they do well to tell us so before they have got a foot in the Stirrup Me thinks ye men of Shaftsbury I see in this Book a Print of the Noble hand that wrote it and of his heart too which plainly threatens that he would if he could furnish us with a Precedent to teach Posterity that One Parliament may hang another What then would a Parliament quickly do with such a DISSOLVER as this if they knew where to finde him out But the singer of God which he talks of may ere long point him out in a stupendious manner before he can bring about his brave intended DISSOLVTION In the rest of his Book to the very end he goes raving on at the like rate telling Stories of time past about the hanging of two Lord Chief Justices and a Lawyer that was one of the Kings learned Counsel and of three Judges and of forty Judges more and of Empson and Dudley in the Reigns of King Alfred Edward the Third Richard the Second and Henry the Eighth But to what end is all this reckon'd up unless it be to flush the Phantsies of the Rabble right or wrong against the good time of DISSOLVING which is as much long'd-for by the Faction as the Jews long for the day of their yet-expected Messiah At length he comes to conclude with an Exhortation to the People of Disobedience to the Acts of this Parliament That in the mean time they refuse to pay Taxes or obey any other of their Acts without first trying their validity by due process of Law And he exhorts also the Juries that upon Tryals they should not finde against their neighbours So here is the Trumpet blown outright for Rebellion But seeing he hath been so plentiful in Stories out of our Chronicles about Examples of Hanging he should have been also on the Peoples side so charitable as to inform them how we
nowhere in our Chronicle can finde a Rebelling against payment of Taxes but it always ended in Hanging the Jack Cades the Wat Tylers and Captain Mendals with all the like Predecessors of this Leading Dissolver But not a word of the Pudding He is so tender of the People that he will not fright 'em his Business being to draw in as many and as fast as he can Mutiny mutiny my dear Country-men said a Rebel in a Stage-play or else I shall be hang'd c. So there is an End of the DISSOLVER and his Threatnings The next Seditious Pamphlet that came abroad appeared with the Title of A Seasonable Question and an Vseful Answer c. I have view'd this Author very well but after a strict impartial Search of him all over I finde that as to matter of Law he writes little yea nothing at all but what hath been said in other words by the two foregoing Writers yet because he hath interwoven many subtil insinuations under pretence of Law and many Scandalous Additions I am constrained to take him also in pieces and more effectually dissolve him than he can the Parliament the designe of this Pamphleter being the same with his fellows And I am the more willing to tire my self out at this Work that His Majesties good Subjects may be throughly informed of all that the Faction is able to alledge against the Legal existence and duration of this present Parliament and then the better judge of the unreasonableness of these mens Suggestions which they scatter all over the Land to impoison the mindes of men and prepare them for the old pious work of Rebelling after the mode of FORTY ONE For as it was in the days of Solomon so all the Designes they are now upon do well agree with the Text There is nothing new under the sun You shall see the old Game of Covenanting Sequestring Slaughtering Plundering Committees increase of Taxes with all the shapes of Metamorphosis in Governments and miseries Acted over again if these men may prevail They are likely to give us nothing New but a New Parliament and that shall be a Swinger as the DISSOLVER hath promised us and told us he hath taken care for the New Elections so that the House shall appear New in its Out-side but in its In-side as like the Old one as one Nut is like another Here perhaps some captious man of malice may be willing to mistake me as if I did declaim against New Parliaments But that I may prevent those that lie at Catch let them know I plead not against them but the having of any other Parliament brought on by Factious Clamours and Outcries in Print or otherwise till this Parliament hath finish'd the Work now in their hands for Setling the Nation with sure Laws and Provisions against Renting and Tearing of it by manifold Factions But to proceed This Book which I am now to Dissect is grounded upon mere Fiction It supposeth a Letter from a person newly chosen to sit a Member of this Parliament one that before he would make so great a Journey to London desires a Friend of his a Bencher of the Temple because there hath been a great noise in the Country that by Law Parliaments are to be held once a yeer and that whereas this Parliament was Prorogued to three months above the term of a year the Prorogation being thereby illegal the Parliament must needs be null and in Law Dissolved And therefore he would be loth to come up two hundred miles to put his neck in a Noose by sitting here as a Member unless his friend the Bencher would satisfie him of the truth of the matter and advise him to come This is the sum of the Question and the Fable is so laid forsooth that the pretended Bencher undertakes to give him his Resolution upon the Point BENCHER This is a Question of the greatest moment that ever was moved in England viz. Whether this Parliament be actually Dissolved by the last Prorogation for fifteen months He that will answer it ought first to consider whether a Prorogation ordered and continued beyond a year can be made to agree with our Laws and the Statutes of the Realm particularly those two Statutes of Edward the third which were re-inforced by that Act of the sixteenth Caroli primi which was repealed by the Act of the sixteenth Caroli secundi wherein this Parliament acknowledged those Statutes of Edw. 3. to be still the Laws and Statutes of the Realm and they in this Act enacted no Clause that abates their force ANIMADVERSION It is indeed a Question of the greatest and withal of the slightest moment that ever was in England slight in the nature of it but greatest in the Consequence and I will shew you how That in its nature 't is but slight and idle appears most abundantly by what I have already given you in the former part of these Animadversions To which give me leave to adde also that it had never been brought under Question if one man in a corner had not failed in all other Tricks to bring about an untimely Dissolution of the Parliament For as soon as ever he was lifted out of the Court the former PACQVET shew'd how bravely he plaid his Game in Parliament by imbarquing both Houses in Disputes about Priviledges which raised so many Broils to hinder them from dispatch of Business that all good endeavours were made vain the Parliament it self became a while useless to the King and unable to do any thing to relieve the pressing Necessities of the Kingdom that so by tiring out the patience and expectations of Prince and people there might have follow'd a willingness on all sides to admit of an Argument for this Parliaments Dissolution and the calling of his Plotted New one But the effect of these his Artificial Contrivances having been prevented by the Wisdom of His Majestie and His Two Houses then he had recourse to this last Device of picking a Hole if possible in this point of the Prorogation which with the assistance of a few Disaffected Lawyers and others was presently done by false Expositions and Glosses upon old Statutes and from hence sprang the Original of this frivolous Question about the legality of this Parliament's longer Sitting which they with more Impudence than Conscience determine in the Negative as hath been manifested unto you so that whoever shall concur with them must obstinately offer violence to his own Reason and all the known Rules of Argument if after due Consideration he shall adhere to their Opinion Moreover though the Question in it self be but slight yet as to the Consequence I agree it may be of exceeding moment as the Devisers thereof intended it For they meant to delude the people into a misunderstanding of the Laws a Jealousie of their Liberties and a disposition to Tumults to the hazard of their Peace their Lives and Fortunes by new Commotions Their Designe is by raising the dust about this
Question to put it in your eyes that you may not discern Right from Wrong Their Business is to get themselves by the help of a Popular Vproar into a Governing posture and to this end they compass Sea and Land to make Proselytes to carry on a general Crucifixion of the present Governours Cares and Sorrows that is a Crown of Thorns they prepare for the head of the King Scandals for his Ministers a Level for the Nobility a Pitfal for the Bishops a Yoke for the Gentry and a Fools Coat for all the Commons that they can seduce into their Party in which they have leisure to repent and once more pay Taxes to fellow-Subjects who as ye may remember do know how to ride you being ready Booted and Spurr'd if you please once more to set them on horseback till you sigh and confess what a Poet said of old Nec enim Libert as gratior extat Quà m Domino servire bono As for the two Statutes of Edward the third you know I have granted that the Triennial Act of Charles the second doth not at all infringe their force and I have told you I wish they may for ever stand to preserve the Right of the King in calling frequent Parliaments when he judgeth them necessary as well as to maintain the Rights of the People in having them BENCHER He talks next of a Statute made in Richard the second 's Reign That Parliaments be held yeerly to redress delays in Suits and to end such Cases as the Judges doubt Also that in the Ninth of Richard the second the Duke of Gloucester told the King That one old Statute and laudable Custom is approved that the King once a yeer do summon his high Court of Parliament as you may read in Grafton ANIMADVERSION First you have onely Grafton's word that the Duke of Gloucester said so And suppose the Duke did say so you have onely the Duke's saying for it and he doth not name the time of that old Statute's making for no such Statute was in being till the time of Richard's Grandfather viz. King Edward the third and then that short succession of time from him could not make any such Statute an old one But I grant there had been an ancient Custom of yeerly Parliaments till at length the people grew weary of it which no doubt was the reason why the House of Commons in Edward the third's time agreed to pass those Statutes not to have them so frequent unless the King should see need For this sence is clearly implied in the very words of the first of the two Statutes as I have shewn before Besides I once again assure you No such Statute is to be found that saith any thing about the matter in the times elder than Edward onely there had been a Custom which the people held as laudable till they saw reason to alter it in that King Edward's days As for yeerly Parliaments to redress delays in Suits of Law and end difficult Cases there is no such Statute which he mentions to be found nor is it likely that the Commons should be called to such kinde of work of determining such Suits they having never had jurisdiction so to do Nor could it have been a Parliament after the manner of the Parliamentary Constitution then in being if the Lords had assembled alone to end Suits Therefore it is in no wise likely that there ever was any Intention to make such a Statute about the Calling of Parliaments yeerly to end such Law-suits Nor are such difficult Suits as pass the skill of the Judges or so many of them happening constantly in a yeers time as to need a Parliament to end them BENCHER The ancient Britains as Dunwallo writes held Annual Parliaments four hundred yeers before Christ and the Mirrour of Justice saith King Alfred ordained parliaments twice in the yeer or oftner and William the Conqueror did the like ANIMADVERSION Here learned Mr. Bencher shews his Reading So the old Britains went naked before Christ's time and many odd fashions came up in the times of the Saxons the Danes and Normans both in Cloaths and Government Doth this oblige us to the like now To what end then is this old thred-bare stuff brought hither to stuff his Pamphlet I have granted over and over that Parliaments of old were so frequent as he saith but I suppose it would do the people of England little service to tell them what a sort of Parliaments they were and how composed of Lords Spiritual and Temporal c. I suppose we should be loth to have such Parliaments now And yet according to Mr. Bencher's learned way of Arguing if we be obliged to one Circumstance of Example we are also as much bound to observe the other If to the timing of Parliaments as of old then also to the form and manner of them But Time and Law having provided better things for the people his Worship's way of arguing Us into old Fashions again is as pertinent as if he would prove John a Nokes should be bound to make all good that was devised by his sixteen hundred and tenth great-great-great-Grandfather whose name was John-a-Stiles if the Writings of the Devise were to be found in Dunwallo BENCHER I must tell you there are those that affirm the Laws for Annual Parliaments to be Musty obsolete Statutes whose strength and life are devoured by Time But it is enough to stop their mouthes that they have been Declared by two Parliaments within forty yeers last past to be the Laws of our Realm ANIMADVERSION Who are they that are so weak-headed as to say they are Musty and Obsolete Neither his Majestie nor his Parliament will give 'em thanks for saying so nor doth the Prorogation need such an Allegation to maintain it good I have sufficiently shewn that the sence of the two Statutes if entirely taken makes fully for the Right of the King to judge whether Parliaments Annually be needful or not and that within Forty yeers time two Parliaments have confirm'd their Frequencie and so frequent as every yeer or oftner if his Majestie see Occasion shall require their Assembling so often Therefore he hath much more reason to defend them than the Faction hath to make such ado about them unless they could get more Credit to their own Cause by a Rational Construction of them BENCHER My Lord Coke saith Instit part 1. page 81. That no Act of Parliament can lose its force or be antiquated by Non-user unless the Reason of it fail and by change of time it become a publike Mischief c. ANIMADVERSION It seems the Reason for having constant yeerly Parliaments did fail in Edward the Third's time or else his Parliament had never devised those two Statutes and put in the words IF NEED BE so far to change the ancient Custom of their frequencie as not to hold them so often unless Need require and of that Necessity who can be a Judge but the King whom our Laws have
Hereditarily invested with all the Rights of Government of which this sort of Judicatory power is a principal Wherefore the Reason of the ancient frequencie being out of date long since it was well done by this Parliament upon new Reason more suitable to the Condition and Temper of this Age to ascertain us of holding Parliaments in the future with frequencie more convenient for us However 't is worth the observation what his Master-ship doth grant that Non-user may antiquate Acts of Parliament and make them lose their Force if the Reason of them fail or if by change of time they become a Publike Mischief As for the Reason of King Edward's Act I have shewn already that his Parliament had nothing in their Reason of making them that savours of the Old Custom of yeerly frequencie otherwise than with Condition there shall be need nor do they contain any sence that gives us cause to plead that they are antiquated or to desire an antiquation of them because to Repeal them would be an Injury to the King But next let me adde this that in the two late Triennial Acts it is implied that in these days things are alter'd to such a pass that there was high Reason to be no longer bound to the ancient Custom of that Annual frequencie which his Mastership pleads for and thereby you have the Determination of two whole Parliaments the FORTY ONE Parliament and this Parliament that the Reason of the said Custom at Common law fails and that publike Inconveniences if not publike Mischief would follow if it were practised in our time or else 't is in reason to be supposed they never would have alter'd it Therefore seeing his Mastership doth admit what I have made evident in the foregoing part of this Discourse that there hath been a Non-user of King Edward's two Statutes in any such sence as he and his fellows do impose they having never been so put in practice by Edward himself or by any succeeding King to this day we with all assurance conclude that a pleading of Non-user is a good Plea against the two Statute's being in force for such an absolute yeerly frequencie as the Faction doth insinuate into the mindes of the people Especially when two Parliaments before-nam'd have judged that Reason of publike Good and Convenience now lies against having them so frequent as within a yeer and that the time of Three yeers is soon enough unless there be need Nothing then but a spirit of Sedition or Treason would have fixed such a Construction as these men have lately made upon the said Statutes with a mighty Clamour as if Noise would carry it among reasonable men But their Construction being every way proved naught all the Arguments founded upon that Bottom do necessarily fall and Master Bencher and the rest of the Disputants ought to be tried before a Bench of Academian Sophisters that they may be brought under Correction for that wretched Beggery A Begging of the Question A way then with the Questions with which he stuffs up all the rest of his Book because they are grounded upon the same sad account of Petitio Principii and so are altogether impertinent to the Point in hand till they can better prove their own Construction of the two Statutes to be a right one or that those Statutes were at any time since their making put in use and practice upon supposal of any such absolute Meaning as he and his Fellow-writers would fasten upon them His Questions follow BENCHER 1. Whether the Statutes for yeerly Parliaments may be dispensed with by the King 's Soveraign Power and Prerogative being as some say onely Counsels and Advices to the King not obligatory ANIMADVERSION Who are those some that say so If any did they talkt as idly as Master Bencher writes and as little to the purpose for his Mastership hereupon starts up an invidious Question Whether the King may dispence with Laws and Statutes I rather suppose the SOME that say so never were men of God's making but mere men of straw set up by Master Bencher for a Tryal of his own Skill in Confutation and Conquest and to entertain his Majesties subjects with Supposals that there is strange Doctrine at Court in matter of Law that so himself may take occasion to lug in a long discourse to prove the Negative that his Majestie cannot dispence But know once for all that there is none under heaven who can be more tender of the currencie of Law and Legal Constitutions than the King Himself is especially such as are Parliamentary and it would be the joy of the Faction if they could really finde Him otherwise or if they could by any Tricks of State such as were shewn in several Sessions of Parliament before last February-Session play in upon Him the necessity of having recourse to that Supreme Law the Idol of the FORTY ONE Parliament Salus Populi suprema lex to save Himself and his People from such Confusions and Destructions as the Counsels of the Faction if they proceed will bring upon us I may well call it the Idol of that Parliament considering how they abused that Maxime in a causless using it against his Majesties Father perfidiously pleading the Safety of the People to justifie whatsoever they did as confidently as if the People could have been saved no other way if they had kept within the Bounds of Ordinary law But the ordinary path of Law is that which his Majestie desires to walk in and to prove the Truth of this we need onely to recollect the past Provocations given Him by the late extravagances of some men which would have provoked any Prince less patient to other Courses than he hath taken to secure Himself his Affairs his Friends and the Interest of his Crown And as to that point of the Prorogation he did not thereby assume to Himself any power to dispence with the Laws relating to the Course of Parliament but kept within the bound of Law as is abundantly proved Therefore the dragging in this Question of yours must needs be very impertinent as well as maliciously meant good Master Bencher and so are all the vile Inferences that you have made thereupon to catch the People BENCHER 2. His Second Point under question is Whether the Kings dismission of the Parliament without any day set for their return and their continuing so beyond a yeer be a Dissolution or whether such a failer in Time onely may by Act of Law dissolve a Parliament even against the Will of the King ANIMADVERSION So so All is out now The main Point they drive at is to Dissolve the Parliament against the Will of the King but what pretence hath the Bencher for declaring it Dissolved Not a tittle more than what was alledged by the DISSOLVER He said Dismission of a Parliament sine Die amounts to a Dissolution But how comes it that the Fifteenth of February the day to which the Parliament was prorogued or dismissed
the King 's Dispensing with them cannot take place with any man that considers the First of those two Statutes viz. That a Parliament shall be holden every yeer once OR more often if need be by which words the King is left onely Judge of the need of a Parliament oftner than once a yeer But whether the King see need or no he is absolutely and peremptorily bound to hold a Parliament once a yeer ANIMADVERSION This sort of men are always up with a great Noise about Property Right and Liberty of the People because most men are wont to be taken with the mention of those matters wherein their Good and well-being is concerned and the Projecting Faction would be supposed to be the onely Advocates for them but alas this is the Faction's old main Engine to catch Proselytes among the injudicious part of the World which are always much the major Part of Mankinde who in the mean time are not able to judge whether Discourses be made rationally or not till the Sophisms or Cheats of such Crafty Writers be discovered And verily I believe this Penman himself if he had pleased might have saved me the labour of discovery for he writes more like a Lawyer than any of his Fellows And therefore he could have told you that the Law of England is as careful for the Prerogative of the King as it is for the Liberty of the Subject and whereas the Government of England hath in all Times even from utmost Antiquity been for a Monarchy the Laws have not left it destitute of Powers to preserve it Self in that Condition and the People ought to be as zealous for the Conservation of it by maintaining the Rights of the Crown as they are for their own because those also were Ordained for Publike good and are as necessary as the other and accordingly the eye of the Law hath been as tender of them as of the other because our Ancestors in framing the Constitution of this Kingdom conceived the end of Government which is Peace publike Convenience and Safety could not well be attained without it Therefore that in this the wisdom of the Law was great of old and ought greatly to be admired is most evident because by late Experience we have found since 1641 that in pulling the Feathers of Monarchy the People did put none in their own Caps but what made them look like Bedlams and become really such by running at last into Anarchy mere Confusion It were endless to bring in here a citation of manifold Provisions made by Law to preserve the Prerogative for they are known to all men that have studied the Law and to most men that have not And therefore in making Interpretations of Law about Government we are when we write to carry an even hand betwixt what is Right for the King and what is Right for the Subject and not draw Conclusions on one side out of literal Expressions and particular Sentences but rather to derive them from the general Sence and Scope of all our Laws on both sides compared one with another and so should this Considerator and his Fellows have done if they had honest Intentions Next as to what he saith of the Peoples Rights and Liberties being bound up in Annual Parliaments 't is so ridiculous that his Masters of the Faction in 1641 would not understand it so They before all things proclaimed to the World that the onely way to preserve the Rights and Liberties was to have a Parliament of length sufficient to sit and dispatch the Publike affairs that is to say they who pretended themselves to be the great Patrons of the Peoples Rights were so far from thinking those Rights were bound up in yeerly Parliaments that they would not be satisfied till they had an Act passed to impower them to sit as many yeers as they pleased which they never could with any face have demanded if the opinion of Lawyers or of the People of that time had been that all our Rights had been so bound up in those two Statutes that to part with yeerly Parliaments had been to part with our Rights and Liberties For it would then have savoured of too rank Hypocrisie before the Multitude and have raised their Jealousie against them had they imagined or should any body have told them that their Rights and Liberties were at Stake by such proceeding of their Patrons Moreover consider this present Parliament's proceeding in those days when but few men offer'd to finde fault with them For when in the Sixteenth yeer of His now Majestie they passed that Act to prevent long intermission of Parliaments it is plain that they were of another opinion than the Considerator and his Fellows For the words and scope of the Act shew they were exceeding tender of our Rights and Liberties yet determined the time of Parliamentary Meetings to once in three yeers which 't is reason to believe they never would have done if they had not understood our Rights and Liberties would have been better provided for by their Triennial than by yeerly Meetings But now adays it is a small matter with our Factious Leguleian Scriblers to form up Opinions upon forged Interpretations of Law and prefer them before the Opinions of whole Parliamentary Bodies whose Wisdom ought to be reverenced as and as it is the Wisdom of the whole Nation In the next place consider how slily the Considerator shuffles in his transcribing one of the two controverted Statutes The first saith a Parliament shall be holden every yeer once AND oftner if need be but he writes OR oftner if need be in stead of AND. It is not out of any inclination I have to Pedantick Niceties or that I think it becomes any man to mingle Points of Philologie with discourse about matters of Politie that I now begin to play the Grammaticaster but when I perceive there is a crafty purpose in altering such a small Particle when one is placed in a sentence in stead of the other I suppose it becomes me not to neglect it especially when it perverts the whole meaning of a Law I dare appeal to the Ferula of Dr. Busby the Prince of Grammarians whether there be not a material difference in signification betwixt AND and OR the former being a Copulative the later a Disjunctive Now the present Dispute betwixt the Considerator and me being this Whether the words IF NEED BE do refer onely to the later part of the Sentence or to the whole Sentence as he a few lines after expresseth and would have those words to refer to the later part onely and therefore would by foisting in the Conjunction Disjunctive OR in stead of the Conjunction Copulative AND dis-joyn the said words IF NEED BE from the first part of the Sentence give me leave to say that he hereby would put upon us a most partial Artifice of Delusion and mere Juggle for by the word OR there may be some colour for his Construction of the Law that
3. cap. 10. That for the maintenance of those Liberties and remedy of Mischiefs and Grievances that daily happen a Parliament should be held once every yeer ANIMADVERSION I cannot but note this Dissolver to be a mere Shifter He shifts that Statute of 4 Edw. 3. out of the way as a thing too hot for him to handle because of the words IF NEED BE. And as he lays that aside so next he turns Statute-clipper cuts off the main Clause which qualisies the Sence of the Second Statute of the 36 of Edw. 3. The words of the Clause are As at another time WAS ORDAINED BY STATVTE Now that other Statute here mentioned is the first Statute of Edw. 3. which ordained that Parliaments shall be holden once a yeer if need be and more often if need be that is to say we shall have frequent Parliaments and as frequent as heart can wish IF NEED require Just so much and no more was Ordained by the former Statute But who shall be Judge of this need or who can be but the King in whom the Law hath trusted the Calling of Parliaments Therefore 't is in Law to be supposed it may be inconvenient for Him to call a Parliament so often as every yeer when in his Judgment He concludes it not needful so to do So much for Clipping the Statute a Crime as bad as Clipping the King's Coyn if not worse But any thing must be done to serve the turn of Dissolution DISSOLVER The reason he saith is because this Parliament hath sat so many years till they are not the Representatives of one half of the People of England And the Gentry who think themselves born to have their share in Ruling as well as being Ruled judge it a very hard thing upon them to be secluded from their hopes of having the honour to serve their King and Country in Parliament ANIMADVERSION A Share of Ruling as well as being Ruled 'T is very fine ye men of Shaftsbury this is so like the language of the Old Levellers who were all for Ruling by Turns that one might almost swear a small Friend of yours was at the Penning it He is always for Vp and Ride and Rule and Rule alone and so is the whole Faction and that is the Reason why they are for a Tumbling-Cast to the present Rulers of Church and State But what Gentry are those who hanker after Rule If to sit and serve in Parliament be to Rule this the Law never understood in England and the Writ of Summons to Parliament saith no such thing the Rule and Empire being vested in the King and those that are by Law deputed under Him for that purpose It was never otherwise understood till that fatal Parliament in FORTY ONE when they wrested the Rule out of the hand of the King and His inferiour Magistrates There were then such a Sort of Gentry got into the House though but few in comparison of the whole number that in order to the gaining of all Rule into their own hands from their Fellow-Members as well as the King first placed it in the hands of London-Prentices till by Tumults and Tumultuous Voting they drave away the rest of the Gentry as well as the King and the majority of the Lords and never left till themselves became the onely Lords of Mis-rule Such Gentry as those were are they that now reckon of Ruling in Parliament one day or other if they can but be rid of this and perswade the People to chuse 'em having to that end a great confidence in the strength of the Tongues and Lungs of their Ambulatory Chaplains The rest of the Gentry understand them well enough and all their Windings and do very well know and are satisfied that here is a full Parliament all places of Members having been fill'd up by Election of new ones as fast as they were vacant and that a convenient duration of this Assembly of the Peoples Representatives as he calls them is the only Expedient to prevent the Designe of that restless Faction in whose Service this Dissolver and his Scribling Companions are listed And now to do the Feat he ventures at matter of Law too and his Arguments are all summ'd up in what follows DISSOLVER By the Statute of 4 EDW. 3. cap. 10. and 36 EDW. 3. cap. 14. and by other Statutes a Parliament is to meet once within a yeer But directly contrary to those Statutes this last Prorogation Order'd the Parliament not to meet within a yeer but some months after and therefore either the Prorogation is null and void in Law and consequently the Sitting and Acting as a Parliament is at an end or else by your Sitting and Acting you will admit and justifie that a particular Order of the King is to be obey'd though contrary to an Act of Parliament and thereby subvert the Government of England by Law So also the King's Order is to be obeyed against Magna Charta Petition of Right c. and we have neither life nor liberty secured unto us Then the Dissolver by vertue of the foregoing Lines goes on to spend four or five pages in setting forth the great hazard of our Laws Liberties and Properties as if all were true he said and concludes all are gone if the Prorogation beyond twelve months were a good one but he saith 't is null and the Parliament null'd therewith ANIMADVERSION Such small Faggots of Argumentation as these are now bound up in Books to fire the Nation if it be possible They first make false Constructions of the two Statutes of Edw. 3. telling the world the King is by them bound to hold a Parliament once within every yeer and if we could grant that to be the Statutes meaning then they might have some shadow of Reason to make Conclusions to their own mindes But I have already made evident that they either misunderstand the Statutes or craftily wrest the sence of them There is no intent in the Statutes that Parliaments be call'd yeerly ex absoluto but they contain a clear Hypothesis as a Salvo for the undoubted legal Prerogative of the King in the words IF NEED BE so that 't is supposed in the Statutes the King hath by his Prerogative-Royal a Right of Judging the time when it is needful to call a Parliament because He and none but He can Call Therefore 't is to be admir'd there should so many words be made about so plain a business For were I never so much a Conspirator in forming Devices for the Destruction of this Parliament I would finde out some more solid Basis to build my Arguments upon than a manifest Contradiction or else certainly I would for shame be silent The two Statutes say we shall have frequent Parliaments and so frequent as once a yeer if there be need But the Factious Dissolver maintains the sence of them to be that we shall have Parliaments once a yeer though there be no need so that you see upon what a wretched
Summons was never question'd nor could the Prorogation have been at all disputed but that the Faction would be so bold and mischievous as to do it and with how slight a colour of Reason you have already seen in these past Discourses And now their last Clamour is that the House of Peers hath condemned the four Lords to Prison for presuming to argue a Nullity of the Parliament And what follows The Dissolver told us in his Pamphlet that a New Parliament is to come that shall call this to account and leave a new precedent to the world That one Parliament may hang another And who knows but that this sort of Pen-men with their Patrons are continually of Counsel with the desperate FACTION The rest of this Writers Pamphlet contains nothing but a partial Relation of Circumstances and Ceremonies which passed in calling the Four Lords to the Bar and about the manner of their Commitment and then he closeth all with a few odious Reflections upon the Lords both Spiritual and Temporal and the House of Commons which here follow NARRATOR He next proceeds in a jeering manner to mention a new Triple League but who are they that are this Triple League He names Bishops Court-Lords and Popish Lords who had already broken through the ancient Rules and Practice of Parliament and all the Laws of England and now would go according to the new Court-word thorow-stitch The rest of the Lords he calls Allies of the Triple League who joyned in the Commitment ANIMADVERSION What a Petition in one hand and at the same time a Poniard in the other Must it be so carried a Petition to the King and the same time a Stab given to his Ministers great Officers Bishops and all the rest of the Nobility of the House of Peers that concurred with them to preserve the Government I would be loth to call the Four Lords and those few that concurred with them on the other side the Allies of the FACTION A New Triple League nor will I let other men think what they please This Jeer sounds like the Witticism of one of them that uses to take care to print all his witty Sayings and Jests as fast as he speaks them especially those against the Court and the Bishops and Ministers of State whom he always dresses with this kinde of Flowers to be offer'd in Sacrifice to his own New Parliament as the old Heathen Sacrificers were wont to dress their Beasts to be offer'd up to their Idols therefore if the word Thorow-stitch were the Word at Court what would become of him and his Triple League if this old Parliament should proceed as roundly as his intended New one would do if we believe the DISSOLVER Then for the Bishops in particular he proceeds thus NARRATOR He saith Vnder pretence of securing the Protestant Religion by Act of Parliament one of the designes of the Triple League is To declare it lawful for our Kings to be Papists As is done in a Bill lately sent down to the Commons from the Lords and I do not hear of any one Bishop but agreed to it ANIMADVERSION This is a Fire-ball with a witness made up of the most dangerous but falsest Ingredients why then should I be long in extinguishing it For the Bishops of England and their Doctrine Discipline and Government will be found the surest Fence against the coming in of Popery as well as against the Invasion of the FACTION and the Slavery of their Discipline Can a greater Provocation be given to the House of Peers and the Bishops The Forming of this Bill was committed to such a Committee of Lords and Bishops that all our world knows them to be Noble and true and as firm as a Rock against the Roman Religion and they took the greatest care that men in prudence possibly could do to secure us from it at present and in future And whatsoever the father of lyes may invent and the FACTION spread abroad to the contrary to exasperate and increase their own Party more could hardly be invented for our Religion's security Sure I am it was thought so by the Papists themselves and to be so severe that they dreaded nothing more than the Consequence of its passing both Houses insomuch that some Lords of that Religion opposed it what they could and spared not to say that after this they expected nothing but Fire and Fagot NARRATOR And that the House of Commons may have their share too of damnable Scandal he lets fly at them without mercy and thus he concludes that they are most of them either French or Court-pensioners Indigent or Out-law'd persons Children Fools or such as are superannuated persons ANIMADVERSION But why French Pensioners c. How then came the Major part to be for an Alliance with the Dutch as appeared by the late Votes and the Address thereupon to his Majesty May not then the other side with as much reason from thence make the like ungentile and unchristian Conclusion that there are Dutch Pensioners too 'T is a miserable pass the world is come to when men shall take up Scandals from Malice Phant'sie or Jealousie to dart at one another and at this rate there can be no end till we have railed our selves round before the eyes of all the Nations of the world and painted out our selves with the vilest Characters to become a subject for their Scorn and Derision It were again to scandalize those worthy Members of the Commons that he aims at for any man to undertake to vindicate them against the foul Imputations of a mad unconscionable sort of desperate Boutefeus 'T is to be hoped the Lords and Gentlemen of both Houses will take heed of these Spirits and by the severest ANIMADVERSIONS of Authority and Justice make their own Vindication FINIS