Ob.
Another Objection made by my Brother Crooke was, 2 R. 2. pars 1. where all the Lords and Sages met together after Parliament, and it was agreed by the Lords, that they could not charge without Parliament: This was a Decla∣ration of the Law in Parliament, and an Act of Parliament, &c.
Ans. I answer, that it was no Act, but a De∣claration in Parliament of the Law; and indeed no Declaration, but a Relation by the Chancel∣lour.
Secondly, If it had been a Declaration, yet it had not been binding without the King.
Thirdly, It is no Precedent of a good Book, it was when the King was young, and the Parlia∣ment had the Regency; Councellors, Treasu∣rers, and all his Officers about his person were chose by Parliament, and therefore no wonder they endeavoured to please the Parliament.
Fourthly, It is a Precedent that they (id est) the Lords could not charge the Commons by themselves.
Again, the Case was not for the defence of the Kingdom, but Wars in France, Scotland, and Ire∣land; these were the many Wars.
Though Subjects may be charged for necessary defence of the Kingdom, yet if Forreign Wars be together with them, it is otherwise; and therefore in the Parliament before they said, such charge belongs not unto them, and there∣fore they hold they ought not to bear it; and so that Rule of Gascoign••, 24 H. 4. fo. 4. that no man shall be charged without Parliament where Bullwarks were built, &c. it proves not, though it implies, that if it had concerned the Kingdom it had been otherwise.