first Marriage was unlawful Queen Mary and if the second was unlawful Queen Elizabeth must necessarily have been Illegitimate I cannot but observe one passage to our present purpose which I meet with in the time of Queen Mary Sir Edward Montague first Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas Mores Reports 827. 828. and afterwards of the Kings Bench one who had the reputation of the ablest and wisest Lawyer of his Age being accused to have drawn the Will of Edward the Sixth whereby that Queen was to have been disinherited and being in great danger upon that account drew up a State of his own case and therein sets forth that the great reason which prevailed with him to obey the King in that particular and upon which he did still rely for his indemnity was that if Queen Mary came to the Crown Eullers Church-History lib. 8. fol. 5. she took it by force of the Act of Parliament which did limit it to her in Remainder so that she came in as a purchaser and not in privity of estate to her Brother and consequently could not punish Treasons or offences committed in his time I must needs also observe that in the Articles made upon the Marriage of Q. Mary with Ph. of Spain which were confirmed by Act of Parliament 1 Mar. Parl. 2. cap. 2. the several Crowns and Territories of Philip are distributed part to Charles the Infant of Spain part to the Issue of the intended Marriage Whereby it does appear not only what opinion all Europe had of the power of an English Parliament but also that by the consent of the Estates of other Realms Crowns might be limited and disposed out of the ordinary course of Descent In the first year of Queen Elizabeth The Parliament recognize her Title to the Crown 1 Eliz. c. 3. with express Relation to the Statute 35 H. 8. which invests it in her and the heirs of her Body and do enact that the Limitation made by that Statute shall stand and remain as Law for ever and all Sentences 1 Eliz. c. 5. Judgements and Decrees to the contrary are declared to be void and appointed to be cancell'd And the several offences which are made Treason by another Statute in the same year are all restrain'd to the Queen and the Heirs of her Body only The Parliament intending to extend that new security no further than her Estate in the Crown which she took by that Parliamentary limitation did extend In her Thirteenth year it was Enacted 13 Eliz. c. 1. Rast Treason 27. That if any person claim Title to the Crown for himself or any other during her Life or shall not upon Demand acknowledge her Right He shall be disabled during his Life to have the Crown in Succession as if he were naturally Dead And to affirm Right of Succession in such claimer or usurper after Proclamation made of such claim or usurpation is made Treason Nor does the Statute stop there but makes it Treason during the life of the Queen and forfeiture of all Goods and Chattels after her decease to affirm that the Queen with and by the Authority of Parliament is not able to make Laws and Statutes of sufficient force and validity to limit and bind the Crown of this Realm and the Descent Limitation Inheritance and Government thereof or that this or any other Statute made by Parliament with the Queens assent is not or ought not to be for ever of sufficient force to bind and Govern all persons their Rights and Titles that may claim any Interest or Possibility in or to the Crown in Possession Remainder Inheritance Succession or otherwise It were well if some rash men who presume in their discourses to restrain the power of the Parliament that is the King Lords and Commons in the great business of the Succession would be so wise as to remember this Act which is still in force and the penalty to which they subject themselves by such sawey Talk That incomparable States-man the Lord Burleigh had another kind of opinion of the Security which an Act of Parliament could give his Royal Mistress Compleat Ambassad fol. 219. by making the Scottish Queen the Popish Successor of that time unable and unworthy of the Succession as appears in a Letter which he wrote about this time to Sir Francis Walsingham then Ambassadour in France In the Twenty Seventh year of Queen Elizabeth 27 Eliz. cap. 1. it was enacted that if any Invasion was made or Rebellion or other thing tending to the hurt of Her person by or for or with the privity of any one who should or might pretend Title to the Crown and the same should be adjudged in such manner as that Law appoints then every person against whom such Judgment should be given should be excluded and disabled for ever to have or claim the Crown And that the Subjects of this Realm lawfully might by all forcible and possible means pursue all such offenders And their Issues assenting or privy thereto are in like manner disabled and to be pursued And this Act was made in pursuance of an Association enter'd into by the People in the vacancy of Parliament out of their great zeal for the preservation of the life of that excellent Princess By vertue of his Statute Mary Queen of Scotland was afterwards executed Strangways Hist of Mary Queen of Scotland fol. 179. as appears by the Commission for her Tryal King James her Son who was a wiser Prince and not wholly govern'd by Priests as his Mother was though he had the same pretences that she had yet never disputed his Right or set on foot any Title during the life of the ever Renowned Queen though she would never suffer him to be declared her successor He was too wise to incur the like disability as his Mother had done and to contest a Title Establisht by Parliament After Queen Elizabeths Death The Act of Recognition made upon King James his coming to the Crown doth particularly insist upon that Title which was raised by Act of Parliament to Henry the Seventh and the Heirs of his body and that immediately upon the Queens decease the Crown descended and came to King James so that you see the Title of Queen Elizabeth is again acknowledged by Parliament And the entail made by the Statute of 35 H. 8. being spent upon her death without Issue King James comes in as next Heir to the old entail made the first year of Henry the Seventh Thus have I set down before you the whole course of the English Succession as plainly as truly and as briefly as is possible I shall leave every man to make his own observations on this Historical Deduction But this one observation I believe all men must make from it That it hath been the constant opinion of all ages that the Parliament of England had an unquestionable power to Limit Restrain and Qualify the Succession as they pleased and that
Edward the Fifth who held it not long enough to have it put on him with the usual Solemnity for though he was Proclaimed he was never Crowned King For his Uncle Richard Duke of Gloucester having secured him and his Brother in the Tower did cunningly insinuate the Bastardy of his Nephew and that Edward the Fourth had another Wife living at the time of his Marriage to their Mother and also at the time of their Birth The Report found Credit universally in so much that the Duke of Buckingham coming to him at Baynards-Castle with most of the great Lords and wise men of the Kingdom and the Mayor and Aldermen of London the Duke did in their Names acquaint him that they had unanimously thought fit to elect him King as being Heir to the Royal Blood of Richard Duke of York upon whom the Crown was entail'd by the High Authority of Parliament 'T is very remarkable that in the midst of their highest Flatteries and Courtship to him they tell him only of this great and sure Title by Act of Parliament although if he had been indeed what was pretended the Heir of the House of York his Right by Descent from Edward the Third was unquestionable Richard after some feigned Excuses did at last accept of their Offer and Election and the Parliament being soon after Assembled Cott. Rec. fol. 709. they presented a Bill to this effect Please it your Grace to understand the Consideration Election and Petition under-written of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and of the Commons c. And thereby they Declare the Children of Edward the Fourth illegitimate Bucks Rich. 3. lib. 1. fol. 22. and that his Brother George Duke of Clarence was attainted of High-Treason by Parliament in the 17th year of Edward the Fourth's Reign by reason whereof all the Issue of the said George were and are disabled and barr'd of all Right and Claim that in any case they might have or challenge by Inheritance to the Crown and Dignity Royal of this Realm by the ancient Laws and Customs of the same After which considering that none of the uncorrupted lineal Blood of Richard Duke of York could be found but in his Person say they We have chosen and do choose you our King and Sovereign Lord. Then the Bill proceeds in reciting that all the Learned in the Laws do approve his Title and declaring him King as well by Right of Consanguinity and Inheritance as by lawful Election and entails the Crown on him and the Heirs of his Body and declares his Son Heir Apparent To which the King gave his Royal Assent in these words 〈◊〉 idem Dominus Rex de Assensu dictorum trium Statuum Regni Authoritate praedicta omnia singula praemissa in Billa praedicta contenta concedit ea pro vero indubio pronunciat decernit declarat But the barbarous Murder of his Nephews did soon beget such an universal Detestation of Richard in the minds of the People that they resolved he should no longer Reign over them and so taking hold of a Pretence which Henry Duke of Richmond set up they joyn'd with him against Richard Though Henry's Title was indeed no more than a meer Pretence for not only the Right of the House of York as far as Blood could give Right was before that of the House of Lancaster but also he had no manner of Interest in that Title which the Lancastrian Line had since his Claim was under a Bastard begotten in Adultery and besides his Mother Margaret Countess of Richmond as Heir to whom he pretended he claim'd was then living Therefore Comines the most judicious Writer of that Age and who knew well what was the sence of Europe concerning his Title says plainly though he wrote in the time of Henry the Seventh Qu'il 〈◊〉 Croix ne Pile ne nul Droit comme Jeo Croy 〈…〉 Nevertheless Henry having slain Richard in Bosworth-field the Crown was there put on his Head by the Lord Stanley with the general Acclamation of the People But he was wise enough to think his Title to it was not very good till it was made so by an Act of Parliament and therefore in the first year of his Reign he procured one to pass in these words For the Wealth Bucks Rich. 3. lib. 5. fol. 145. Prosperity and Surety of this Realm of England and for avoiding of all Ambiguities and Questions The wisest of our Princes you see had no little Opinion of the Authority of a Parliament in this point Be it Ordained c. That the Inheritance of the Crown of the Realms of England and France with all the Preheminences and Dignities Royal to the same appertaining and the Ligeances to the King belonging beyond the Seas c. shall be rest remain and abide in the most Royal Person of our Sovereign Lord Henry the Seventh and in the Heirs of his Body lawfully coming perpetually with the Grace of God and so to endure and no other Thus did the wisest of our Kings establish himself Lord Bacon H. 7. f. 11 12. and the best of our Historians mentions it as one of the greatest Instances of his Wisdom That he did not press to have this as a Declaration or Recognition of Ancient Right but onely as an Establishment of the possession which he then had nor to have the Remainder limited to any person after the determination of his Estate but was content with the Settlement upon himself and the Issue of his own Body leaving it to the Law to decide what was to follow upon the failure of such Heirs Nor can any thing be more clear than that Henry the Seventh depended entirely on this Parliamentary Title without extending any pretences of his or his Wives who was Heir of the House of York beyond this Establishment in as much as the Oaths of Allegiance and other publick Tests and Securities which were required at that time of the Subjects were not in general Terms to the King his Heirs and Successors but only to the King Burnet's Hist of the Reformation Collect ad lib. 2. fol. 3 4. and the Heirs Male of his Body lawfully begotten An Instance of this without going any further may be seen amongst the Records Printed at the end of the late History of the Reformation where Cardinal Adrian when he was promoted by Henry the Seventh to the Bishoprick of Bath and Wells renounces all Clauses in the Popes Bulls which may be prejudicial Domini meo supremo Haeredibus suis corpore suo legitime procreatis Angliae Regibus and he does afterwards swear Allegiance to him in the very same Words without taking any notice of Remoter Heirs Henry the Eighth the Heir to this Entail Succeeded his Father and though he attempted as much for Arbitrary Power and used Parliaments with as little respect as any of his Predecessors Yet even he never doubted of their Power in settling the Succession but valued it much and resorted
to it frequently In the 25th year of his Reign an Act passed St. 25 H. 8. cap. 22. wherein the Parliament say they were bounden to provide for the perfect surety of the Succession they did not certainly reckon themselves bound to do a thing that was not in their Power And then they take notice of the great Mischiefs and Effusions of Bloud which had happened by reason of the doubtfulness of the true Title and for the avoiding of all future Questions do Enact That the Imperial Crown of this Realm shall be to King Henry 8th and the Heirs of his Body Lawfully begotten on Queen Anne and the Heirs of the Bodies of such several Sons respectively according to the course of Inheritance and for default of such Issue then to the Sons of his Body in like manner and upon failure of such Issue then to the Lady Elizabeth and after her to any other Issue in Tail and then the Remainder is limited to the right Heirs of Henry the 8th By the same Statute every Subject at his full Age is oblig'd to take an Oath to defend the Contents of it and the refusal is made Misprision of Treason And the next Parliament 26 H. 8. c. 2. which was held in the year following does particularly Enact an Oath for that purpose Some few years after these Acts were Repealed 28 H. 8. Rast Crown 4. and the Parliament Entailed the Crown upon the King and the Heirs of his Body by Queen Jane And Power is given the King for want of Issue of his Body to dispose of the Succession by his Letters Patents or his last Will. It is also made Treason if any Usurp upon those to whom it is so appointed Here the Parliament do not only use their power of changing the Succession but they Delegate it to another And in the thirty fifth Year of this King's Reign 35 H. 3. cap. 1. the Parliament by another Act take notice of the great and high Trust which the Subjects had in him in putting into his hands wholly the Order and Declaration of the Succession Yet the King being then ready to go into France they do Enact that after his Death and the Death of Prince Edward without Issue the Crown should be to the Lady Mary and the Heirs of her Body but both subject to such Conditions as the King should limit by his Letters Patents or by his last Will sign'd with his Hand And if the Lady Mary performed not those Conditions that then the Crown should go to the Lady Elizabeth as if the Lady Mary had been dead without Issue and if the Lady Elizabeth neglected to perform such Conditions then it should go to such other Person as the King should appoint in the same manner as before as if the Lady Elizabeth had been dead without Issue And Authority is given to him by his Letters Patents or his last Will signed with his own Hand to appoint the Crown to remain to such Person or Persons and for such Estate and under such Conditions as he should please An Oath also for observing this Statute is appointed and it is made Treason to refuse it or to disturb or interrupt any Person to whom it is limited by this Act or should be by the King pursuant to the Power given him thereby This is abundantly sufficient to prove That it was the universal Opinion of that Age That the Succession was wholly under the Controul of Parliament who not only limited it as they pleased themselves but subjected it to Conditions and to the Appointments of others But the thing was in its own Nature so evident that they who had the greatest Reason and were most concern'd to do it did never presume to question the Power of a Parliament in this Point Lethington Burn. Hist Reform Collect. 268. Secretary of Scotland in a Letter of his written to Sir William Cecill then Secretary of State here wherein he argues in behalf of the Title of his Mistriss Mary Queen of Scots to succeed Queen Elizabeth against a pretended Disposition made by the last Will of Henry the Eighth to his Neece the Lady Frances Daughter to the French Queen if his own Issue fail'd says of these Statutes that gave the King Power to dispose of the Crown That they were against Equity to disinherit a Race of Forreign Princes and that they were made in an abrupt Time as he terms it but yet he confesses that since the thing was done it was now valid and unavoidable unless some Circumstances did annihilate the Limitation and Disposition made by King Henry's Will And so he proceeds to prove that the power which was given to the King by these Statutes was not pursued which it ought to have been most strictly and in a precise Form for that the King never signed the Will but that his name set to it was forged Nay I will venture to say that in all the Books which were written to support the Claim of the Scottish Queen against King Henries Will though the whole power and wealth of the Guises were employed to set every wit at work on that Design there was never any stress laid upon it Treatise of the Title of Queen Mary to the Succession pag. 38 39. c. lib. 2. Dodd Engl. Lawyer pag. 8. or so much as a pretence that these Acts of Parliament were void or ineffectual in themselves In that Discourse which was published by Philips and composed by Sir Anthony Brown one of the Justices of the Common Pleas who was in judge Dodderidges opinion a person of an incomparable sharpness of Wit There was all the help that learning either in Divinity Civil or Common Laws could give yet there the Authority of the Parliament in the case and the validity of these Statutes is all along admitted Indeed they endeavour to put some other construction upon the Statutes but their great Argument is That King Henry as King had no power to dispose of the Crown and therefore these Laws only gave him an Authority and made him only as it were a Commissioner and therefore as all other Authorities especially being in Derogation of the course of the Common Line was to be strictly followed They allow that he had sufficient power to Devise and that he might Honourably have used that Power but that he ever did exercise that Authority is the thing denyed But it is time for us to go on Edward the Sixth succeeded his Father and took upon him a power which surely no King ever had to dispose of his Crown by the Will But that disposition serving to no other purpose but to the Ruine of the Lady Jane Gray His Sister Queen Mary first and after Queen Elizabeth enjoy'd the Crown according to the Limitation of the Statute 35 H. 8. c. 1. and that one of them had no other Title must be agreed by all For Queen Catherine was alive at the time when Elizabeth was born so that if the
to shew that all Conquest does not put the Conquerour into an Absolute Right Though it be most evident in the case of William the First who did by his Sword prosecute a claim of another nature and meant only to acquire that Right and after conquest rested in it He pretended to the Crown as the Gift of King Edward and to vindicate that Title he enter'd with Arms. And though his Relation to the Crown was more remote than that of Edgar Atheling then a child yet his Title was better than Harolds the present Usurper who could pretend no kindred at all and who had himself Sworn to support the Grant to William Nor did he claim a Power by conquest though the name of Conquerour was given him by after times says Daniel but submitted to the orders of the Kingdom desirous rather to have his Testamentary Title than his Sword to make good his succession But I will admit that he made an absolute conquest and then these men will grant that he might himself dispose of this conquer'd Kingdom Therefore if he did not leave it to descend in such a manner as they would have it go nor did institute any such sort of Succession surely this Argument of theirs will fall to the ground Now 't is plain that he never design'd that the Crown should descend but gave it to his second Son and thereby gave an early example of excluding and pretermitting the unworthy Lastly Others object that the Fundamental Laws of the Land against which no Act of Parliament can be of force have so establisht the Succession that the course of it cannot be alter'd This is surely a new discovery unknown to our Fore-fathers as the foregoing History does abundantly prove But let these objectors be asked by what Authority these imaginary Laws were made For if an Authority equal to that which made them be still in being That Authority may certainly repeal them when ever it pleases to exert it self If the King alone made them no doubt but that he may change them too If they will say they were made by the diffusive body of the people they run before they are aware into the guilt of worshipping that Idol The Multitude and make a great step towards placing the foundation of the Government upon contract and consent But then let them produce those Laws or some Authentick memorial of them before it be exacted from us to believe there were ever any such Yes they will say there is such an ancient Law acknowledged by all the Judges and known to every man that the Descent of the Crown purges all Defects whatsoever This Maxim as it is usually repeated is in these words and this might be admitted and yet could not be pertinently apply'd to a case where the Descent it self is prevented by a Law But I will not take advantage of their words but will consider the Objection as it stands in that Book where the first mention of it was made 1 H. 7. f. 〈◊〉 b. Que le Roy fuist person able discharge d'auscun attainder eo facto qu' il prist sur lui le Reign estre Roy. and that is in the Year Book of Henry the Seventh it being said there by the Judges That the King was a person Able and Discharged of any Attainder eo facto that he took upon him the Government and to be King First This was not only an extra-judical opinion but was not pertinent to the Question referr'd to their consideration Whether those who were chosen into the House of Commons and were at that time attainted of Treason might sit in Parliament till their Attainders were Reversed and they all agree that their Attainders should first be annulled But then they proceed to say that there was no necessity that the Kings Attainder should be Reversed for that he might enable himself and needed not any Act of Reversal But surely they said very wisely in what they said for he who had won a Crown in the field had gone a great way towards enabling himself to wear it Most sure it is that if an Act of Reversal were necessary before he could sit that then it was impossible he ever should sit there because no such Act could be made without the Royal Assent Henry the Seventh was then King de facto and in possession of the Throne and it was somewhat of the latest to consider whether he was qualified or not Certainly it had been strange self-denyal in the Judges and a neglect of themselves which is not usual with them to have alledged an Incurable Disability in the King from whom they had their Patents and Authority In the next place let us consider what precedent the Judges cite to justifie this opinion of theirs and how apposite it is Henry the Sixth being driven out of the Kingdom by Edward the Fourth The Conquerour call'd a Parliament and got an Act to pass whereby Henry was disabled to hold the Crown About ten years after Henry regains the Kingdom and upon this re-accession to the Crown as 't is usually call'd This Act is never repeal'd But does not every Child see the Reasons of it For if Henry was Lawful King and before he was not to doubt that The Act it self was void in as much as it wanted the Royal Assent So that for him to have procured an Act of Repeal had been to affirm a Title to the Crown in Edward But without doubt this opinion of the Judges as it is apply'd by the Objectors was new and unheard of before We see the King of France was otherwise informed by the learned men in the time of King John for they thought his Blood corrupted Mat. Westni 275. v. supra and him uncapable of taking the Crown by Descent because he was Attainted of Treason which prevailed with that King to send over his Son Lewis to put in his claim in right of his wife who was the next Heir It also ought to be observed that the true Reason why the generality of the Nation did so long approve the Title of the House of Lancaster was because all the Princes of the House of York were Attainted of Treason and their Blood corrupted But as soon as ever this corruption was purged and Richard Duke of York was declared Heir Apparent by Parliament the people soon forsook the Lancastrians and set the House of York in the Throne Nay the very learned men of the same Age with these Judges though quite otherwise as will appear beyond contradiction in this samous case which follows Richard the Third had two Elder Brothers Edward and George Duke of Clarence Richard designing to secure the Crown to himself had procured the Children of Edward to be declared Illegitimate yet still the Duke of Clarence had Issue living which might pretend But observe what the Parliament say as to this in the first year of Richard the Third V. Sup. Cott. Rec. 709. That in the seventeenth year
the Crown and the name and power of King discharging all his Subjects from all Oaths which they had taken of Allegiance to him confessing himself thereby insufficient for the Government and swearing never to make any pretences to the same for the future All which he Pronounced and Subscribed wishing if it were in his power to have Henry Duke of Lancaster for his Successour but since it was not he desired the Commissioners to signifie his Desires to the States of the Realm The next day all the States of the Realm accepted his Resignation and when that was done they proceeded to read publickly his Coronation-Oath and all the Breaches of it that so it might appear how justly he had deserved to be deposed All which are contained in Thirty three Articles entred at large in the Rolls of Parliament and well deserve to be read whereupon the States adjudged that he shall be Depos'd and appoint Commissioners ad Deponendum eundem Richardum Regem ab omne Dignitate Majestate honore Regiis vice nomine authoritate omnium statuum praedictorum prout in Consimilibus casibus de antiqua consuetudine dicti Regni fuit observatum which the Bishop of St. Asaph did in full Parliament in their names and by their directions The same Commissioners were also to resign up to him their Homage and Fealty and intimate the Sentence of Deposition which they did accordingly by the Mouth of Sir William Thirning whose words are at large entred upon Record Then did the Parliament proceed to choose Henry the Fourth King And upon this Title onely did he rely though he mentioned some other trifling ones as that he challenged it being then void by Force as Descended to him from King Henry the Third But this could give him no Title for 't is plain that whilst any of the Issue of Lionel Duke of Clarence the Third Son of Henry the Third were in being no right of Blood could Descend to him who derived his Pedigree onely from John of Gaunt who was but his Fourth Son And he plainly shewed what a good Opinion he had of a Parliamentary Title to the Crown when in the 7th year of his Reign 7 H. 4. cap. 2. he procured an Act of Parliament to pass whereby the Inheritance of the Crown and Realms of England and France were setled upon himself for Life and the Remainder entail'd upon his four Sons by name and the Issue of their Bodies begotten He was contented that it should be limited no farther but that after failure of his own Issue it should go according to the general direction of the Law And he made a Charter soon after whereby he setled the Crown pursuant to this Act of Parliament Bucks Hist R. 3. l. 2. f. 50. Post ipsum successive haeredibus suis de ipsius Corpore legitime procreandis which Charter was again confirm'd in Parliament the 22 December 8 H. 4. and the Original Charter is still to be seen in the Cotton Library Immediately upon the Death of Henry the Fourth a Parliament met at Westminster and there according to the custom of the Realm it was debated who should be King But all Men had entertained so good thoughts of Prince Henry that without staying till the whole Assembly had declared him King divers of them began to swear Allegiance to him A thing strange and without President as only occasioned by the extraordinary Opinion which was generally conceived of him before And the certain Title vested in him by an Act of Parliament Princeps Henricus facto Patris sui funere Concilium Principum apud Westmonasterium Convocandum Curat in quo de Rege Creando more Majorum agitabatur Continuò aliquot Principe ultro in ejus Verba jurare coeperunt quod Benevolentiae Officium Nulli priusquam Rex renunciatus esset praestitum constat Adeo Henricus ab ineunto aetate spem omnibus optimae Indolis fecit Pol. Virg. l. 22. Hist Angl. in Vit. H. 5. Henry the Fifth dying and leaving but one Son who was an Infant of Eight Months old Titus Livius says there was some doubt whether he should be accepted as King Titus Liv. Ms in Bibl. Bod. Cott. Record f. 666. but as soon as his Fathers Funerals were Solemnized the Estates of the Realm of England Assembling and Consulting together they declared Henry the Sixth to be their Sovereign In the Thirty fifth year of Henry the Sixth a new Limitation of the Crown was made by Parliament for though the King had a Son then living yet it was Enacted Hubington's Hist E. 4. f. 10. That during his own Life onely Henry the Sixth should hold and enjoy the Crown and that during his Life Richard Duke of York should be reputed and stil'd Heir Apparent to the Crown and that it should be Treason to compass his Death Cott. Rec. 670. Fructus Temp. part 7. f. 162. and after the Death Resignation c. of Henry the Crown was limited in Remainder to Richard and his Heirs with a Proviso that if Henry or any in his behalf should endeavour to disanul or frustrate this Act that then Richard should have the present possession of the Crown And by force of this Act of Parliament the same Duke of York taking advantage of Henry's Violation of it did lay claim to Hubingt E. 4. f. 73. and attempt the recovery of the Kingdom as also did his Son Edward after him with better success and Edward did openly insist upon this Title in the Speech which he made at his Coronation It was also Declared by Edward's first Parliament in the first year of his Reign that Henry the Sixth having broken the aforesaid Concord in many particulars the Crown was duely devolved to Edward the Fourth by vertue thereof Afterwards Edward the Fourth being driven out of the Kingdom in the Tenth year of his Reign the Parliament did again entail the Crown on Henry the Sixth and the Heirs Male of his Body with the Remainder to George Duke of Clarence Brother to Edward the Fourth who was thereby also declared Heir to Richard Duke of York 'T is worthy observation that both the Families of York and Lancaster claimed a Title by Act of Parliament and as long as that Title continued the Issue of Henry the Fourth had never any Disturbance from the Pretences of the House of York who had undoubtedly the Right of Blood on their side Buck's Hist Rich. 3. lib. 1. fol. 20. But as soon as Richard Duke of York had a Title vested in him by the Statute made in the Thirty ninth year of Henry the Sixth then he thought it was worth contending for nor did he and his Son desist till they had driven out Henry the Sixth Edward the Fourth did recover the Kingdom again as suddenly as he lost it and prevail'd with his Parliament to repeal that Law which was made during his Expulsion and so left the Crown to that young unfortunate Prince