Selected quad for the lemma: parliament_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
parliament_n	house_n	king_n	officer_n	2,496	5	7.4181	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56225	The Vniversity of Oxfords plea refuted, or, A full answer to a late printed paper intituled, The priviledges of the University of Oxford in point of visitation together with the universities answer to the summons of the visitors ... / by William Prynne, Esq. ...	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.; Allestree, Richard, 1619-1681.; Fell, John, 1625-1686.; Langbaine, Gerard, 1609-1658.; Waring, Robert, 1614-1658.	1647 (1647)	Wing P4121; ESTC R5306	43,159	69

THE Vniversity of OXFORDS Plea refuted OR A full ANSWER to a late printed Paper Intituled The Priviledges of the Vniversity of Oxford in point of Visitation Together with the Vniversities Answer to the Summons of the Visitors Manifesting the Vanity and Falsity of this pretended Vniversity Priviledge and Plea to the Visitors Jurisdiction That the right of Visiting the Vniversity of Oxford is onely in the Kings Majestie and that it is exempt from all other Iurisdiction by its Foundation Prescription and severall Grants of Exemption And insufficiency of all the Allegations and Authorities produced to support it Published for the information of the Iudgements and satisfaction of the consciences of all ingenuous Members of that Vniversitie who onely out of Ignorance or Error not Obstinacy or Malignity have demurred to the Iurisdiction of the Visitors thereof though appointed authorized by Ordinance of Parliament and Commission under the Great Seal of England By William Prynne Esq one of the said Visitors Prov. 19. 20. Heare Counsell and receive Instruction that thou maist he wise in in thy latter end London Printed by T. B. for Michael Spark 1647. ROBERT DAVIES of ILannerch● Denbighshire● The Vniversity of OXFORDS Plea refuted THE ingenuous Answer of some of the Doctors and both the Proctors of my Mother-University of Oxford to the honourable standing Committee of Lords and Commons for its regulation on the 16. of this instant November before whom they were then personally convented for demurring to the jurisdiction of the Visitors appointed them by both houses of Parliament to this effect That they did in their former papers presented by the Proctors October 8. by way of petition onely represent their sense of their own priviledges and their Obligations as they conceived by divers oaths for the maintaining of them without circumscribing or limiting much lesse denying or contemning the authority of the Lords and Commons but purposely avoyding as still they did desire to avoyd all questions of so high and transcendent a nature it being possible that they might be in an errour and yet to be obliged in conscience not to do otherwise then they have done till they are convinced of that errour And therefore humbly d●sired convenient time to advise with councell more fully to inform themselves in a case so extraordinary and of so great concernment not onely to themselves but to the whole Vniversity in present and in future c. enduced me not onely then to move this honourable Committee that the University and they might be fully heard by their Counsel on a convenient day to alledge whatever they could both in maintainance of their respective Answers delivered in under their hands to some of the Visitors and then by them there acknowledged which was accordingly ordered in their favour But likewise to borrow some time from my other employments to examine and refute all those pretended University priviledges and false allegations to support them in a Letter lately printed at Oxford by the Universities approbation if I am not misinformed entituled The Priviledges of the Vniversity of OXFORD in point of Visitation c. which hath seduced many to dispute and disobey the Visitors power wherein the substance of all their Objections against the Visitors jurisdiction in point of law or conscience are comprised that so I might in a University way by strength of argument and evidence not by power and force inform the misguided judgments and satisfie the erronious consciences of all such members of this University liable to our visitation whose obstinacy or malignity shall not render them altogether incapable of better instruction and consequently of any hopes of commiseration or pardon for their contumacy I● is not my design in this summary Discourse to enter into any large debate of the Sovereign power of both houses of Parliament whose supream jurisdiction to visit punish reform all abuses and corruptions in the Kings own Court in the highest Courts of Justice the greatest Officers of State and in all Corporations and Societies of men whatsoever within this Realm I have largely vindicated in a other Treatises seeing the University it self and the parties convented do willingly wave this dangerous Dispute as fatall and destructive to them if positively insisted on but onely to demonstrate to them the vanity and falsity of this their pretended Priviledge they peremptorily assert and principally rely on as their lawfull Inheritance and Birth-right which they are obliged by oath and duty to maintain That the right of visiting the Vniversity of Oxford is onely in the Kings Majesty and that it is exempt from all other jurisdiction both by foundation prescription and severall grants of exemption This their claim and assertion I shall irrefragably falsifie and refute by Histories and Records which cleerly evidence First That the University of Oxford was anciently of right for many ages under the jurisdiction if not visitation of the Bishop of Lincoln as he was their Diocesan Secondly that it was anciently of right and so continued till this Parliament under the visitation jurisdiction of the Archbishops of Canterbury as Metropolitanes who have frequently visited this University and Cambridge too as being within their Province and have been acknowledged and adjudged by King Richard the second King Henry the fourth and an whole Parliament in his reign and by King Charles himself upon solemn debate to be lawfull Visitors of it de jure And that these three Kings and the Parliament of 13. H. 4. have by their Charters and Votes absolutely disclaimed the King's sole right of visiting the Universities and alwayes resolved the contrary when the Universities for their own ends have set it on foot and laid claim unto it no King of England before Henry the eight ever visiting either of the Universities for ought appears by any authentick Records Thirdly That the Pope by his Legat hath visited both Universities without resistance or any Plea put in to his jurisdiction no longer since then Q. Maries reign and that the Universities are subject to their Chancellours jurisdiction and visitation too by their own conffessions Fourthly That most particular Colledges and Hals in both Universities as Colledges Hals and Members of the University● have their particular Visitors appointed by the founders to whose visitation and jurisdiction they are subject and not to the King's alone Fiftly That their pretended grants of exemption were procured onely from Popes not from the Kings of England that our Kings themselves one Parliament have damned them as derogatory to the King's Prerogative even in times of Popery and the Vniversity it self disclaimed and renounced them both before the King and in full Convocation as a grievance not a priviledge obtained against their wils and without their privity to their prejudice When I have made good these positions the whole University and their Delegates if not stupendiously obstinate must necessarily retract this their Plea as false and nugatory and disclaim their imaginary Priviledge For the first

Parliament in the 13. yeer of Queen Elizabeth rot. 36. the title whereof is onely mentioned in the printed Acts therefore the Parliament being the true Founders of it have best right to visit it by the common Law by us their Commissioners as this Objection proves Sixtly this plea That the Vniversity is of the King's foundation only as the Objector grants is but the Vniversities own device who anciently did and yet do shelter themselves under the title of it against their lawfull Visitors and are very ill advised to fly to this false shelter now since three Kings and one Parliament have severall times driven them from it as the premises evidence Seventhly admit the antecedent true that the King and his Predecessors were sole Founders of the Vniversity yet the sequell is unfound Ergo they only are the Visitors of it and none others seeing I have proved that others have of right visited and had jurisdiction in and over it as a Vniversity from time to time besides our Kings and that of right by our Kings and Parliaments resolutions notwithstanding this pretext of being sole Founders Eightly the King and his progenitors by their Charters are as much Founders of every Corporation every Company of Merchants and other Tradesmen in London and other Cities as of the Vniversities will it therefore follow Ergo none must visit or regulate them but the King and the houses of Parliament the Committees for Trades Complaints Grievances Clothiers Weavers c. may not regulate nor reform them much lesse the Lord Major and Court of Aldermen as they have usually done Ninthly the Book of 6 H. 7 14. is no resolution but a private opinion It only speaks of the Kings free Chappels without cure which he or his Chancellours shall visit not the Bishop but by Commission not of Vniversities or Colledges the thing in question nor yet of Monasteries Churches and Chappels with cure of souls which the Archbishop and Bishop of the Diocesse shall visit though built founded and endowed by the King himself as this very Law-book 6 H. 7 14. grants whence most ancient Abbies founded by our Kings were exempted from archiepiscopal and Episcopal visitation and jurisdiction by special Charters confirmed in * Parliament and Popes Buls the King's meer foundation and Charters alone being no legall exemption from their power by the common or Canon Law As for the Statute of 2 H. 5 c. 1. it speaks only of Hospitals of the King's foundation that the Ordinaries shall visit them by his Commission not of Colledges or Vniversities without the words and intention of the act Tenthly this and other Law-books onely say that the Bishop shall not visit Hospitals and Free-Chappels of the King's foundation but no Book avers the Houses of Parliament may not visit them nor their Delegates and to argue the Bishop of the Diocesse may not visit the King's Free-Chappels or Hospitals Ergo the Parliament may not do it is no better Logick then The Ordinary cannot visit nor reform the greatest Officers of State the Cours of Justice at Westminster the Kings own Court nor any civil abuses and publike grievances Ergo the Houses of Parliament cannot do it Yea all our Books agree that the Bishop by Commission under the great Seal may lawfully visit the Kings Freechappels Foundations and the stat of 2. H. ● c. 1. enacts as much But we have such a Commission to visit the University therefore we may lawfully do it These answers I suppose have sufficiently shaken the sandy foundation of the Universities Exemption the Kings Foundation of it whereon they most rely Yea but the Objector learnedly replys p. 3. Here you may please to consider that the Foundation of the Vniversity being the Kings personal act his interest lies not within the reach of that Beaten evasion of a publike and politique Capacity I answer I understand not wel what he means by the Kings personal act Unless the act of the King in his natural Capacity as a Man not in his Politick as a King If so then it follows 1. That the King and his Progenitors as Kings in their publike and politick Capacities were not founders of the University but only in their natural as private men which subverts his own assertion and foundation 2. That this priviledg of a Founder is not annexed to the Kings publike and politick but natural and personal Capacity and so not descendible nor hereditary since personal actions acts and priviledges by the rules of the Law * die with the person If he mean by the Kings personal act that the King in person laid the very first Foundation stone of the University with his own hands or writ and sealed the Patent or Charter that first founded it himself and not by any Substitutes or Officers This wil b● hard for him to prove and the sequel wil be That the King only in his own Royal person must visit the Vniversity now but net by any Commissioners or Delegates and so all his other Foundations contrary to all former presidents Statutes and Law-books that he may visit them by Commissioners which the Un●versities Answer acknowledgeth and himself to● The next Ground of Exemption urged is pre-scription and Bulls of Popes both which being abandantly refuted in the premised positions and no plea at all against both Houses of Parliament or any power derived from them not mentioned nor included in nor yet confinable by these Bulls though they might hold good against any ordinary or inferior Jurisdiction if true I shall here therefore pretermi● without further Answer The 3d ground of Exemption alleaged it * grants of Exemption by Popes allowed and confirmed by Charters from several Kings both by themselves and in Parliaments to prove which there are quoted in the Margin some Popes Buls out of H●re the old book of Oxford Statutes and the Senior Proctors Book with this addition 25. H. 8. c. 21. All power of Visitation is given only to such as shall have immediate Authority by the Kings Commission under the great Seal of England in places formerly exempted as COLLEDGES c. All Letters Patents heretofore made by the Kings Progenitors in behalf of the Vniversities are confirm'd by act of Parliament 13. Eliz. 19. Eliz. part 13. in Dorso The Priviledges of the Vniversity are confirm'd in the very words of Boniface 8. acknowledged they had them by prescription the immediate subjection of the Vniversity to the Authority and Iurisdiction of the Prince and all their other Exemptions ratified and those acknowledged to be sworn to in the Oath taken by every Graduate These are all the evidences of moment produced to make good this ground I answer 1. That all these Popes Bulls of Exemption now insist●●●on were so farr from being allowed and confirmed by Charters from several Kings both by themselves and in Parliaments that King Richard the 2. and King Henry the 4. by both their Charters and in Parliament upon

solemn debate disallowed ●ulled and declared them meerly void and the University it self absolutely renounced them as nullities and prejudicial in both their Raigns King Charles himself by his Charter ratifying and approving their resolutions herein as I have proved Therefore this allegation is a most palpable falshood there being no one Charter nor Act of Parliament that ever allowed or confirmed them before or since these Kings Declarations of their nullity And admit these Bulls so confirmed yet they ex end only to exempt the University from Archiepiscopal or Ordinaries Visitations and Jurisdictions not from the Kings or Parliaments not mentioned nor intended in them I shall close up this with Matthew Parkers Authority the first Arch Bishop of Canterbury in Queen Elizabeths Raign De Antiqu. Eccles. Brit. p. 35 before the Arch-Bishops lives where thus he writes of the Jurisdiction of the Arch Bishop of Canterbury even in this Queens Raign of these Popes Buls nullity Episcopatus et Diocaeses suae Provinciae quandocunque et quocunque ordine sibi videbitur expedire visitat c. Tamque latè patent hujus Archiepiscopatus privilegia ut in loca firmissimi● septa ac munita privilegijs se insinuent Multa onim loca quae a Metropolitica et Ordinaria Iurisdictione se eximi procurassent ab hujus tamen Authoritate immunia ac tuta esse non poterant Inter quae ILLAE CELEBRES CANTABRIGIENSIS ET OXONIENSIS in Anglia ACADEMIAE quanquam peculiaria jura et exemptionis privilegia sibi quondam á Papa concedi procurassent illis tamen authoritate posteá Regia irriti● ac rescissis IN CANTVARIENSIS ARCHIEPISCOPI AVTHORITATEM SESE REDDIDERVNT et tam VISITATIONES SVAS SVBIRE COGVNTVR quàm ad Synodalia sua concilia per Cancellarios acceduxt In Cantabrigiae Collegio S. Petri cujus Eleensts Episcopus est patronus sede vacante tàm Praefectum quàm socios admittit et uni scholarium cui gratificare voluerit vacantsem societatem confert OXONII Collegiorum omnium animarum et Mertoniensis est Patronus ac in utrisque Ordinariam et OMNIMODAM JVRISDICTIONEM EXERCET So that he reputed this Jurisdiction of visiting the Vniversities a Right belonging to the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury notwithstanding any pretended exemptions Charters or Statutes to the contrary then in being or the Bulls of Pope Boniface the 8 which Ioannes Cajus De AntiqueCantabrig Academiae p. 71. confesseth to be abolished by the Le●ters Patents of K. Richard the 2. made to Arch-Bishop Arundel in the 20. year of his Raign and after confirmed by King Henry the fourth and an act of Parliament in the 13 year of his Raign as the Premises at large demonstrate 2. I answer that the objected clause of the Act of Parliament 25. H. 8. c. 21. extends not at all to the Vniversity of Oxford or any Colledges in it as is most evident by the express words of the proviso which I shal here transcribe Provided always that the said Arch-Bishop of Canterbury or any other person or persons shal have no power or authority by reason of this act to visit or vex any Monasteries Abbies Priories Colledges Hospitall houses or other places Religious Which be or were exempt before the making of this act any thing in this act to the contrary thereof notwithstanding But that Redress Visitation and Confirmation shall be had by the Kings highness his heires and successors by Commission under the Great Seal to be directed to such persons as shal be requisite for the same in such Monaster●●s Colledges Hospitals Priories houses and places Religious exempt So that no Visitation nor Confirmation shal from henceforth be had or made in or at any such Monasteries Colledges Hospitals Priories houses and places Religious Exempt by the said Bishop of Rome nor by any of his authority nor by any out of the Kings Dominions nor that any person Religious or other resiant in any the Kings Dominions shal from henceforth depart out of the Kings Dominions to or for any Visitation Congregation or assembly for Religion But that all such Visitations Congregations and Assemblies shal be within the Kings Dominions By this it is apparant First that this act extends only to such * Colledges is were Religious Houses consisting of Menks and Friors not to Colledges of Schollars in the University as the coupling it with Monasteries Abbies Priories and other Places RELIGIOVS and the last clause Nor that ANY PERSON RELIGIOVS depart out of the Kings D●minions to or for any Visitation or Assembly FOR RELIGION manifests 2. That it excludes only the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury his Commissaries and under-Officers formerly mentioned in the body of the Act the any other person or persons intended in this clause from visiting these exempted Colledges and Religious Houses and that not simply but BY REASON OF THIS ACT Not the Houses of Parliament or any V●sitors of their appointment 3. It extends only to Colledges not to Vniversities not once named or intended in this Law And a Colledg especially of Monks and Religious persons as here is one thing a Vniversity another by the Objectors own concession p. 6. 4. It reacheth only to such Colledges and Places Religious as were exempt from Archiepiscopal and Episcopal Vis●●ation AT BEFORE THE MAKING OF THIS ACT Therefore not to the Universities and Colledges of Oxford and Cambridg which at and before its making were not exempt but subject both to the Arch-Bishops and Bishops Visitation and Jurisdiction as I have largely proved 5. Such exempt Colledges as are within this Act are to be visited not by the King in person or such persons as he shall personally nominate as the Objector dreams no such words being in this Act but BY COMMISSION UNDER THE GREAT SEAL TO SUCH PERSONS AS SHAL BE APPOINTED and requisite for the same that either by both houses of Parliament or by the Keepers of the Great Seal who usually nominate and appoint all Commissioners of the Peace Sewers Oyer and Terminer for Visitations Inquiries and the like not the King in person And the present Visitors of Oxford being thus appointed by Ordinance of both Houses and by commission under the Great Seal are sufficiently authorized to visit the Vniversity and Colledges in it admit them places exempt within this proviso as they are not 6. Admit all that can be it is clear that both H●uses of Parliament by this Law conferred the Power of visiting Monasteries Abbies Priories Colledges Hospitals houses and other places Religious exempt before this act from Archiepiscopal and Ordinary Visitation on the King his heires and successors who could not confer it on themselves Ergo by the self-same reason both Houses may now by Ordinance and Commission lawfully conferre the like power of visiting the University though formerly exempted on the Visitors now appointed by them they being the supream Visitors and Reformers of all corruptions and abuses both in Church and State and appointing who shal

have no absolute definitive power in all things but are subordinate to the Honorable Committee of Lords and Commons for regulating the University to whom they are to certifie all their proceedings to whom there is liberty of appealing granted to any that deem themselves injured so as this Honorable Committee and both Houses are in truth the real Visitors the others but their Substitutes Therefore these scorns against their persons which must reflect upon the Parliaments wisdom and judgment might have wel bin spared As for any of their interests engagements and professions I shall beleeve they are all publike and syncere til the contrary be demonstrated The next exception is to their proceedings * That their power was not manifested by some legal way c. I answer That this is untrue ●or it was first manifested by a printed Ordinanos of both Houses wherein their names and power were comprised 2. In a publike Citation subscribed by most of them of which all the University Colledges and Halls had legal notice 3. By an additional Ordinance of both Houses and a Commission under the Great Seal of England of which they had a copy delivered to them upon their own request by the Visitors that sate The last Objection is * That there is now no necessity nor want of a Visitation c. I answer That this is to question the wisdom of both Houses who deem a Visitation necessary and to prejudge the Visitors who may find more enormities in the persons to be visited then they can yet discern in themselves who * are no competent Iudges in their own cause However if their Innocency be such as to evidence to the world they are not those Monsters that their Enemies Charactor would speak them Nor yet are altogether unworthy their Education or their Founders Magnificance as the Objector blasons them they have then the lesse cause to refuse or decline the Visitors test and wil come off with greater honor to themselves and shame to their unjust Accusers if they appear such after stricktest S●rutiny then if they had not at all been brought to such a publike Tryal I have now made good all my Positions and answered all the Universities allegations in point of Law or Conscience against their present Visitors Jurisdiction not out of any design to diminish or infringe the Universities just Priviledges which I have been formerly sworn to maintain in the least title but out of a real affection to the Universityes welfare and a desire to rectifie the erronious Judgments and satisfy the scrupelous Consciences of all present Opposers of the Visitors power to prevent those tragicall effects which their Obstinacy and Contumacy in this high contest are like inevitably to produce to their own and the Vniversities prejudice if persisted in I shal ever endeavour to my power that the University may enjoy all her just Rights and Priviledges with Subordination to both Houses superior Authority and flourish more abundantly now then ever in piety vertue and all sorts of learning which they cannot take unkindly at my hands I shal only add That as the Vniversity of Cambridg submitted to the Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament made for its regulation dated 22. Jan. 1643. which enabled the Honorable Ea●le of Manchester alone to appoint a Committee under him who should have full power to call before them all Provosts Masters and Fellows of Colledges Students and Members of that Vniversity who were scandalous in their lives or ill affected to the Parliament or fomentors of these unnatural wars or wilful refusers to obey the Ordinances of Parliament or deserters of their places of residence and to send for witnesses and examine any complaint or testimony against them upon Oath and to certify their names with the Charge and proofs against them to the said Earle who had power thereby given him to sequester and elect them and put others in their places which he accordingly executed without any such publike opposition as we now find at Oxford So I hope the Vniversity of Oxford wil receive so good satisfaction of their scruples from the premises as shal enduce them to a like submission to their present Visitors authorized by both Houses Ordinances and a Commission under the great Seal without any further plea or demurrer or else leave them without excuse to both Houses severest justice for their wilful contempt of their Soveraign power against which they have publikely in words disavowed the least opposi●ion or dispute and yet strenuously oppose it in reallity by this contest against their Visitors upon meer groundles Pretences so frequently over-ruled against them heretofore that it can be b●t meer obstinacy in them to insist upon them any longer now The Statutes of 9. H. 5. c. 8. 1. H. 6. c. 3. 2. H. 6. c. 8. 14. H. 8. c. 2. 5. 21. H. c. ●6 1. E. 6. c. 14. 7. E. 6. c. 5. 1. Phil. Mar. c. 3. 1. 2. Phil. Mar c. 7. 8. 2. 3. Phil. Mar. c. 15. 1. El. c. 4. 5. El. c. 8. 13. El. c. 10. 12. 18. El. c. 6. 20. 3. Iac. c. 4. make mention of the Vniversities and give them some priviledges but no exemption from Visitations and prescribe Laws unto them ERRATA P. 18. l. 9. read facturusque p. 20. l. 10 they were p. 23. l. 12. Ordinationi l. 31. pradictarum p. 25. l. 13. factis p. 31. l. 5. Academiae l. 38. university p. 38. l. 4. primitus p. 40. l. 17. quos P. 27. l. 3 in the margin Episo p. 31. l. 18. 1407. FINIS a The Sovereign Power of Parliaments and Kingdomes Part 1 2. and the Appendix at the end of the fourth part a About Anno 1300. b Anno 1475. c Tiguri 1589. a Godwin's Catalog●e of Bishops p. 241 242. who likewise recites this controversie b Londini 1572. c Godwins Catalog●e o● Bishops p. 242. d Catalogue of Bishops p 95 245. Godwin's Catalogue of Bishops p. 246. * Pag. 5 6. * Ex memorand Phillip Repingdon Epist. Lincol f. 196. f Note this the very first Plea of our Oxonians now g The same with the Oxenians second Plea in words and substance n I doubt these pr●●ended Bu●s were mcc● forgeries and bais indeed o The xouians third Plea in words and substance p This was direct perjury since Archbishop Arunde● visited that University all Colledges in it An. 1477 not 30. yeers before p. 3. 54. c. p The Oxonians fourth Plea in substance and words q Alledged by the Oxonians too i The Oxonians Argument too * There is no such Commission to be found k This Commission is extant m There is no such Commission extant in the Rols * Pag. 7. * Speed's History p. 1066 1085 c. * P. 9 10 11 21 36 38. Object The Unversities Priviledge p 2 3. Answ. * Godwins Catalogue of Bishops p. 404. * Spelman Concil. Tom. 1. p. 631. to 635. Ioan. S●ldeni No●ae ad Eadmerum p. 165. * Actio personalis moritur cum persona Object 2. Object 3. * Page 2. 3. 4. Answer * See Speeds Catalogue of Religious houses Colledges and Hospitals * See the Charter of 36 E 3 pars 1 mem. 5 Rot Claus. 9. R. 2 15 R 2 mem 17. in Tur. London to this effect p 41 * Here p 36 Object 4. * Page 4. Answer Object 5. * Page 6. Answ. Littleton l. 2. chap. 1● co●ks 1 Instit f. 65 〈…〉 * See Gratian Caus. 11 qu. 3 * Caus. 11. q. 3 * Fox Acts and Monuments Vol. 3. p. 765 766. * Our Ordinances and C●mmissions do so in express words Obiect 6. * Page 4 5. * Do not the King and Parliament let parts judg the whole Answer * Sir Natha Brent Object 7. * Page 5. Answer Objection * Page 6. Answer * unusquisque sui ipsius iniquus Iudex