Selected quad for the lemma: parliament_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
parliament_n	assent_n	king_n	royal_a	3,228	5	8.0365	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27541	Ludlow no lyar, or, A detection of Dr. Hollingworth's disingenuity in his Second defence of King Charles I and a further vindication of the Parliament of the 3d of Novemb. 1640 : with exact copies of the Pope's letter to King Charles the first, and of his answer to the Pope : in a letter from General Ludlow, to Dr. Hollingworth : together with a reply to the false and malicious assertions in the Doctor's lewd pamphlet, entituled, His defence of the King's holy and divine book, against the rude and undutiful assaults of the late Dr. Walker of Essex.	Ludlow, Edmund, fl. 1691-1692.; Bethel, Slingsby, 1617-1697.; Charles I, King of England, 1600-1649. Reply to the pope's letter [of 20 April 1623]; Gregory XV, Pope, 1554-1623.	1692 (1692)	Wing B2068; ESTC R12493	70,085	85

to bring a Traytor to Justice to secure us of the sitting of a Parliament once in three Years when the antient Laws gave us a right to Annual Parliaments and when he had to the high violation of those Laws kept us without a Parliament for about eleven Years These Acts say you their Majesties Malapert Chaplain at Aldgate are such Gracious Favours that if we will have them we ought in all Conscience to buy them But our English Parliaments have always been of another Mind and Sir Robert Cotton tells us in the Life of King Henry the Third That that King was told in full Parliament that they would not pay his Debts nor give him a Groat postquam coepit esse dilapidator Regni so long as he continued to destroy the Kingdom And pray now turn to your Bible and tell me what Text there doth warrant this your wild Opinion Where are we now But buy these Acts did they Pray who had the disposal of the Money how was it laid out was it given to the King to do what he listed withal No you know a great part of it was bestowed on the Scots for the good Service they did in rebelling against their King and putting two Kingdoms into a Flame I did observe in my Letter to you that the King had out of the Subjects Purse in the first Year of the Parliament Nov. 1640. one Million and an half of Money I also remember that the King upon the Conclusion of the Treaty at Rippon agreed to allow the Scots 850 l. per diem and in answer to your question I say the King had the disposal of the Money and as to what part of it the Scots received the King paid it to them for his having done against all Law and Reason what he listed And I will shew you from the Demand of that Nation who ought to have paid the Reckoning They say We were constrained to take Arms for our Defe●ce The War on our part was Defensive and all Men do acknowledg that in common Equity the Defendant should not be suffered to perish in his just and necessary Defence but that the Pursuer ought to bear the Charges of the Defendant The prevalent Faction of Prelates and Papists have moved every Stone against us and used all sorts of Means not only their Counsels Subsidies and Forces but their Church-Canons and Prayers for our utter Ruine which make them obnoxious to our just Accusations and guilty of all the Losses and Wrongs which we have sustained And therefore we may now with the greater Reason and Confidence press our Demand that the Parliament the Kingdom and the King himself may see us repaired in our Losses at the Cost of that Faction by whose Means we have sustained so much damage We will never doubt but the Parliament in their Wisdom and Justice will provide that a proportionable part of the Cost and Charges be born by the Delinquents We wish the Justice of the Parliament may be declared in making the Burden more sensible to the Prelates and Papists than to others who never have wronged us which will conduce much to the Honour of the King and Parliament Page 27. You take notice of my Charge that the King demurred to pass the Bills for taking away the S●ar-Chamber and High-Commission Courts at the time when he passed the Poll-Bill though presented together to him for the Royal Assent and demand whether he ought to have passed them without a Why or a Wherefore No by no means you talk now like a Rational Creature We are then to look for the Why 's and Wherefore's You acknowledg in your first Defence that these Courts were Grievances to the Nation and I said and by many sad Instances proved that they were Arbitrary and Tyrannical Courts Forges of Misery Oppression and Violence There 's then a Why for you Doctor The Parliament agreed with the King to give him the Poll-Bill to remove these accursed Courts of Oppression and Tyranny There 's also a Wherefore Nevertheless though the Parliament voted that he should pass all the three Bills or none at all he snatching up their Money runs away and delays to pass the Bills for abrogating the Star-Chamber and High-Commission Courts and yet you affirmed That HE READILY passed whats●ever Bills the Parliament offered to him for redress of the Nations Grievances And whether he did or not was the point in Controversy between you and me The next thing in course is Page 28. the unhappy Earl of Strafford's Case in relation whereunto you most learned Doctor whose Head is swell'd like any Bladder with Wind and Vapour do ●hus impeach the Lords and Commons Do not you know they were so little satisfied with the Legality of their Proceedings that they in the very Bill for his Attainder inserted a Clause that this should not be made use of as a Precedent for the time to come This is well enough urged for a D. D. and is passable the Man who utters it being considered But I must tell you Sir what I have heard as wife a Man as you say about this Clause of not bringing it into Precedent that in such Cases it could not be otherwise without leaving the same Power to the Judges in Westminster-Hall which by the Statute of Edward the Third is intrusted only with the Parliament for that Statute ennumerating all Treason cognizable by the Judges reserves to the Parliament declarative Treason as that which they might be safely intrusted with though it could not be so in the Hands of any other Jurisdiction And that this is the reason of that Clause I am told no Lawyer though never so much a Tory will deny Allow me now Sir seeing we are talking of Strafford to lay before you a pleasant Dialogue which I find in Whitlock's Memoirs pag. 41. between your three Martyrs the King the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Earl of Strafford together with the Lord Cottington a Papist and that upon the 5th of May 1640. the very Day upon which the Parliament was dissolved for their refusing to furnish Money to carry on the wicked War then resolved upon against Scotland the Paper is entituled No Danger of a War with Scotland if Offensive not Defensive K. Charles How can we undertake Offensive War if we have no Money E. of Strafford Borrow of the City 100000 l. go on vigorously to levy Ship-Money your Majesty having tryed the Affection of your People you are absolved and loose from all Rule of Government and to do what Power will admit Your Majesty having tried all ways and being refused shall be acquitted before God and Man And you have an Army in Ireland that you may imploy to reduce this Kingdom to Obedience For I am confident the Scots cannot hold out five Months Arch-bishop You have tried all ways and have always been denied IT IS NOW LAWFVL TO TAKE IT BY FORCE Lord Cottington Leagues abroad there may be made for the Defence of the