Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	great_a	king_n	parliament_n	3,205	5	6.3516	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A60118	The Justice of the Parliament, in inflicting of punishments subsequent to offences, vindicated and the lawfulness of the present government asserted : with some animadversions upon the second vindication of the magistracy and government of England.	Shower, Bartholomew, Sir, 1658-1701.	1689 (1689)	Wing S3651; ESTC R15074	22,626	35

in words at length Indeed he does say That it was agreed to be so in the House of Commons 1 Jac. 2. and when a Motion was made to renew that Law the Lawyers answer was That the 25 E. 3. did the same thing I have enquired of some diligent and observing Members of that Parliament concerning the truth of this Allegation and they assure me there was no such Answer made by the Lawyers nor no such thing agreed by the House but they give me this Account of the matter There was a Bill brought in to renew the Statute of 13 Car. 2. and upon the second or third reading it was moved by Mr. Tipping 't is for his Credit to be named That there might be an explanatory Proviso That Preaching Writing or Speaking against Popery and against the Doctrines and Principles of the Church of Rome should not be construed or intended within the intent of the Act. This was thought so reasonable that it was immediately agreed unto and a Committee appointed presently to withdraw into the Speaker's Chamber to pen the Proviso and the Bishop of St. Asaph came there to be assisting in it Upon this the Bill was dropt and let fall and no man ever after pressed it further which may give all men satisfaction what use was at that time designed to be made of it and that all our Learned Clergy who did since Preach and Write against Popery would have been in danger if the Bill had passed to have been construed into a Treason Praemunire or some other great Penalty within the intent of that Bill to the ruine of Them and their Families This was in King James's first Parliament when we had the most simple plain and solemn Assurances of Protecting our Religion and our Laws that was possible to be devised It does now sufficiently appear how insufficiently our Author has answered this Argument of the Justifier 'T is true he does make an Apology and a very pretty one it is That he is confined to a Sheet and therefore cannot enlarge He says when he comes to answer Mr. H. That he wants time But I desire to know How it comes that he cannot spare time or that he is limited to a Sheet Who is it that does set these bounds unto his Writings It were to be wished That the person who has so great Authority over him as to confine him to a Sheet would improve it a little further and engage him not to write at all If it had been a year ago I should have presumed he were thus streightned from the attendance he owed to some great Place for I believe truly his Parts Learning Integrity and other Qualifications could not fail of recommending him to an Eminent Office perhaps a Recorder of a Great City or the like in the late Reign The Reader may observe what sort of man he is who when he is gravell'd and can offer nothing of Reason is forced to have recourse to so poor and pitiful a shift as to pretend he wants time or that he is confined to a Sheet which bears the Price of four Sheets and considering the value of if he might have afforded more of them for our Money X. In the same Page he observes That the Justifier lays down a Rule for Construction of Statutes That a thing particularis'd in one part is not to be construed within the general words of another part but that Rule has near fourscore Exceptions in the Books Besides it comes not to this Case for here is compassing the King's Death made Treason and declared by Overt-act then levying War is made Treason Now says the Repliant nothing can be an Overt-act of the first that does any way concern the latter which is a Non sequitur c. 1. 'T is very true the Justifier does lay down the Rule and does thence deduce That conspiring to levy War cannot be within the meaning of the Clause of Compassing the King's Death in the Stat. E. 3. because levying War is particularly mentioned in the Statute after 2. The Rule is admitted but it has it seems near fourscore Exceptions though by reason of the misfortune of our Author 's being confined to a Sheet or time being wanting he has not obliged his Reader with one of that great number It would have been much more material for him to have shewed That any of the said Exceptions or the Reason of them did extend to the Point in Question than to tire his Reader with a long impertinent Preface and a tedious insignificant Digression of the King's Prerogative of Peace and War which take up two or three Pages If he had omitted these he needed not to have exceeded the Standard of a Sheet and yet have room enough to have given better and more satisfactory Answers if he could 3. The Consequence That conspiring to levy War is not an Overt-act of the Compassing c. because it belongs to another species is clear from the express words of Coke and Hales which see in the Justification And if the Makers of the Statute had designed to conclude Conspiring c. it would not have cost them above three words more to have added it to the Clause of levying War where it would have more properly come in then under the Clause of Compassing to which it has no Relation nor no Man could dream of finding it The positive Opinions of Coke and Hales the Authority of a Rule of Law and the consideration of the motive and end of the Statute which all make against our Author do justly merit so great a Complement and Respect to be paid them that the Case should be admitted to be doubtful and if it be doubtful then by the express Direction of the Act the Judges ought to have suspended their Judgment till they received the Determination of the Parliament Our Author refers to the Sheet for several Instances to the purpose I have examined a great many of them at length I was weary and I 'le assure him there was not one that warranted the Judgment in my Lord Russel's Case Mr. H. has been so particular in answering them that he has saved all others the Labour I do not say but that there has been as extravagant Opinions as this as in the Case of him who said His Son was Heir to the Crown meaning a House that had a Crown for a Sign to it and of him Who wished Stag-horns and all in Kings Belly meaning one of that Name c. These and the like were in violent corrupt times adjudged Treason but no man ever defended these Resolutions or esteem them to be Law tho they have the Sanction of the judicial Opinions of their side XI He proceeds and says The Lord Cobham 's Case is endeavoured to be answered by a wonder that Sir Edward Coke late Lord Chief Justice and then Sheriff should differ from Mr. Attorney Coke for we know his Thoughts in Sir Walter Rawleigh 's time and in his Speeches in Car.

of my Lord R. resolves into this That he being upon good and rational Grounds determined in the belief that King Charles the Second and the Duke of Y. had conspired to abolish the Church of England and to subvert the Laws and the Government and observing the Counsels Measures and all the Proceedings of the Court to be correspondent to that End and to have a direct and natural tendency towards it He did joyn with one Judas but with divers other Great and Worthy Personages to consider how to preserve our Religion our Government and our Laws in that time of danger and distress For before the date of any of the pretended Treasonable Practices objected to him it ought to be remembred 1. That the Fountain of all our Laws and Liberties our High Court of Parliament was polluted by Court-bribery and Subornation 2. That it had been frequently and abruptly broke up and dissolved before it could perform any of the Trusts or Duties it owed to the Country 3. That there was an infamous Declaration ordered to be read in all Churches solemnly in the time of Divine Service against the Proceedings of the House of Commons which could have no other aim than to render that part of the Constitution obnoxious to the People and to make them believe it was become impracticable and unsafe for the Government to assemble them 4. That there was a mortal Wound given to the Privilege and Rights of Parliament by the Trial of Fitzhrrris in the Kings-Bench being under an Impeachment and by the Encouragement and Welcome given to the Addresses and Abhorrences of the Mobile importing a Condemnation of Parliamentary Proceedings 5. That there had been Witnesses tampered with if not actually suborned to swear divers Noblemen and Gentlemen out of their Lives 6. That there was a bold and open Incroachment on the Charter and Franchises of the City of London which usher'd in that general Desolation which succeeded on all the Corporations of England The extorting the Charters from all Cities and Burroughs by Quo Warranto's and involuntary Surrenders which divers were forced to make to save their Lands and their Charitable Donations which they were threatned should be otherwise seised did effectually encompass the Design of overturning the Government For all Writers in Politicks do agree in this Proposition That when the Legislative Power is removed or altered from that Place State or Position in which it was setled upon the Original Constitution that Government is dissolved And I think it very clear that by the Destructions of the old Charters and the Establishment of our Cities and Burroughs under the new the King had in effect usurped the whole Legislative Authority For he had before a Power over two Parts of it which were Himself and the House of Lords because he could prefer what Number he pleased of his own Creatures to be Members of that House who should vote as He should order and direct and he had now got the House of Commons under his Girdle by the Powers he reserved in the New Charters to model and change the Magistracy and the Officers who had the Conduct of the Elections and the right of returning the Persons Elected In these violations of our civil Rights some Persons as I have the Charity to believe did ingage and concur through Inadvertency not seeing through that Scheme which had been concerted between the two Brothers for the bringing about their design and these withdrawing from their Counsels when it appeared bare-faced and their being so instrumental and assisting to the late Revolution and the setling us in our present Condition of Happiness seems to Attone for past Errors 7. It must not be forgot that originally in Scotland the Priviledges of the Subject were greater and the Prerogatives of the Crown not so large as in England and yet there the old Constitution was so demolished that there hardly remained the Ruines of the ancient Government but it might be said jam seges ubi Troja fuit and there was avowedly exercised an Arbitrary and Despotick Jurisdiction The Duty and Obligation of the King was as great to govern the People of Scotland according to their Laws as to govern us according to our Law and therefore we might conclude we should receive the same fate and the same measures of Justice whenever the King should think it as safe and as feasible There were these and several other palpable steps and advantages towards Popery and Arbitrary Power antecedent to any of the Facts charged on my Lord Russell And was it not every English Man's Duty as well as Interest to endeavour a stop to the Course of those Counsels which were so directly aimed and levelled at our Church and Government And was there the least Proof that my Lord Russell's Consent or Privity extended any further IV. In Page 3. He bestows large Commendations on the Person that was the Kings Sollicitor at that time and excuses the Council by saying That every Advocate is to do his utmost and a failure had deserved the worst of Names c. I do acknowledg that in all times Lawyers have allowed themselves too great a Latitude when they Act meerly as Council and 't is an Opinion that has obtained among us That we ought not judicially to be called to an Account for any thing we offer or press in favour of our Clyent or against his Advesary so we have it in our Instructions and though I must always have a deference to the Memory of my Lord Coke and must own my Obligations to his Learned and Painful Works yet I cannot without the highest degree of Indignation consider his Conduct when he was Attorney General against Sir Walter Raleigh in his Tryal nor can I forgive my Lord Bacon for his vehement and partial streining of Law and Fact against his Patron and Benefactor the Earl of Essex in his first Tryal upon the Articles exhibited against him for miscarriages in Ireland But let it not pass for Authentick Doctrine That a Council is a Criminal or that he does not perform his Duty if he does not impose false Law upon the Court and false Facts and false Consequences deduced from the Facts upon the Jury which was plainly done in the Case of my Lord Russell as has been already and shall be in this again further evinced As to the then Sollicitor's Character if his Actings as Counsel against this Honourable Lord and some other Persons be put in a Parenthesis 't is as great as any Man of the Profession of the Law but if he were my Father I must condemn his Deportment in those Cases and some others whilst he was Sollicitor to the two last Kings V. In the same Page our Author says That the World guesses that he who wrote the Reply viz. Sir R. A. did write the half Sheet called the Justification and says 't is really sportive to read the Justifier commending the Defender and Replyant doing the same good Office for the