hous of York that challenged the Crown and died in the quarrel His son was Edward the 4. The Issue of the Duke of Glocester Thomas of Woodstock had onely one childe Anne married to the Lord Stafford whose issue came after in regard of this marriage for Thomas was Earl of Buckingham too to bee Duke of Buckingham som of whose blood are yet in England The Issue of John of Gant by his first Wife John of Gant had three Wives 1 Blanch the heir of Lancaster aforesaid by whom hee had Henry 4. and Philippe married to John King of Portingal from whom are lineally descended such as at this day claim interest in that Crown and Elisabeth married to John Holland Duk of Exceter whose grand-childe Henry left onely Anne married to Sir Thomas Nevil Knight from whom the Earl of Westmerland is lineally descended By his second Wife By his second Ladie Constance daughter of Peter King of Castile hee had onely one daughter Katharine married to Henry the third King of Castile of whom the King of Spain that now is is lineally desended By his third Wife Henry 7. his Title His third Katharine Swinford daughter to a Knight of Henault and attending on his wife Blanch hee used as his Concubine in his wife Constance's time and begat of her three sons and one daughter and after married her to Swinford an English Knight who dead and his wife Constance also hee married her Anno 1396 and caused his said children by her to bee legitimated by Parlament Anno 1397. Henry 7. his Title from Lancaster His sons were 1. John Duke of Somerset 2. Thomas Duke of Excester 3. Henry Bishop and Cardinal of Winchester His daughter Jane married to the Earl of Westmerland The Issues of all these were soon spent except of John of Somerset who had two sons John and Edmund John one onely daughter Margaret married to Edmund Tidder Earl of Richmond by whom hee had Henry 7. Edmund and his three sons all died in the quarrel of the Hous of Lancaster without Issue The line of Clarence and Title of the Earl of Huntington George Duke of Clarence second brother of Edw. 4. had Issue Edw. Earl of Warwick put to death by Henry 7. and Margaret Countess of Salisbury married to Sir Richard Poole of Wales by whom hee had Henry Arthur Geoffroy and Reynald after Cardinal Henry Lo. of Montague put to death with his mother by H. 8. had Katharine married to the Earl of Huntington they the now Earl c. and Wenefred married to Sir Tho. Barrington Arthur Marie married to Sir John Stanny and Margaret to Sir Tho. Fitzherbert Geoffrey Geoffrey Poole hee Arthur and Geoffrey which yet live in Italie Henry 7. his Issue The Title of Scotland and of the Ladie Arbella Henry 7. had by the eldest daughter of Edw. 4. for of all the other three remaineth no issue besides Hen. 8. Margaret first married to the K. of Scots they James 5. who Mary mother to the now King After married to the Earl of Anguis they Margaret married to the Earl of Lenox they Henry married to the last Queen and murthered 1566. and Charles married to Elisa Ca4dish by whom the Ladie Arbella The Title of the Lord Beacham and his brother Marie the second daughter first married to Lewis 12. of France without issue then to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk they Francis married to Henry Gray Marquis Dorset after Duke of Suffolk beheaded by Q. Mary they Jane married to Dudley both beheaded Katharine first married to the Earl of Pembroke and left by him to the Earl of Hartfort as themselves affirmed in the Tower from whom descendeth the Lord Beacham and Edward Seymer his brother The Title of the Hous of Derbie Eleonor second daughter to Ch. Brandon and the Queen of France was married to Henry Clifford Earl of Cumberland they had issue Margaret married to Henry Earl of Derbie who had issue the last and the now Earl CAP. IV. The Controversie between the Houses of Lancaster and York The Pretence of the Hous of York BY Richard Duke of York son of Richard Earl of Cambridg aforesaid c. That considering hee had by descent joined in him the right aswell of Lionel Duke of Clarence second son to Edw. 3. as of Edward Duke of York the fourth son of Edw. 3. hee was to bee preferred before the Hous of Lancaster claiming onely from John of Gant the third son of Edward 3. Richard 2. Deposed Edward 3. in his old age for the love hee bare to the black Prince confirmed the Succession by Parlament to Richard 2. his son and caused the rest of his sons to swear thereunto Richard 2. for his misgovernment was deposed by common consent and Henry 4. chosen in his place which himself and his issue possessed about 60 years The question is Whether King Richard were rightfully deposed or no That a King may bee deposed on just causes First that a King on just causes may bee deposed is proved by Reason becaus the rule beeing given by the Common-wealth on condition of just government that much violated the condition is broken and the same Common-wealth may take the forfeiture This proved by the autoritie of all Law-makers Philosophers Divines and Governors of Common-wealths and by example of divers Depositions which God himself hath blessed with good success Proved by reasons and examples of Divinitie An ill Prince is an armed enemie with his feet set on the Realm's head whence hee cannot bee plucked but by force of Arms Object God may cut him off by sickness or otherwise and therefore wee are to attend his good pleasure Answ. God alwaies bindeth not himself to work miracles nor often with extraordinary means but hath left upon earth unto men and Common-wealths power to do justice in his Name upon offendors Examples hereof are Ehud stirr'd up by God to kill Eglon King of the Moabites by a stratageme Judg. 3. and the Philistins to kill David to persecute Saul Jeroboam to rebell against Roboam the son of Solomon 2 Reg. 11. 12. Jehu to depose Joram and Q. Jezabel his mother 4. Reg. 9. The Captains of Jerusalem at the persuasion of Jehoiada the high-Priest to conjure against Q. Athalia whom they deposed and Joash chosen in her room 4. Reg. 11. All which hee might have removed without blood-shed if hee would But hee appointed men to work his Will by these violent means to deliver that Common-wealth from oppression and for the greater terror of all bad Princes Allegations of the Lancastrians that King Richard 2. was justly Deposed Just causes of Deposing Richard 2. were Hee murthered his Uncle the Duke of Glocester without form of Law or process Hee put to death the Earl of Arundel banished Warwick Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury and Henry Duke of Hereford and Lancaster and after King whose goods and inheritance descending to the said Henry from his Father hee wrongfully seized on Hee suffered the Earl of Oxford
heads For which cause the States of Venice and Genoa which were wont to have simply this Government of Aristocratia were inforced in the end to chuse Dukes The Division and Factions among the Senators of Carthage was the cause why Aid was not sent to Hannibal their Captain in Italie after his so great and important Victorie at Canna which was the very cause of the saving of the Romane Empire and the loss of their own As also afterwards the Emulations and Discord of the Romane Senators in the Affairs and Contentions of Marius and Sylla and of Pompey and Caesar was the occasion of all their Destruction and of their Common-wealth with them Why Helps are given to Kings Therefore it appeareth that of all other Governments Monarchie is the best But for that a King is a Man as others be and thereby not only subject to Errors in Judgment but also to passionate Affections in his Will It was necessarie That the Common-wealth should assign him the best Helps that might be for Directing and Rectifying both his Will and Judgment Lawes the first Help why given The first Help is the Law which Aristotle saith Est mens quaedam nullo perturbata affectu and in the same place addeth That he which joyneth a Law to Govern with the Prince joyneth God to the Prince but he that joyneth to the Prince his Affection to Govern joyneth a Beast So that a Prince Ruling by Law is more than a man or a man Deified and a Prince Ruling by Affections is less than a man or a man Brutified In another place also the same Philosopher saith That a Prince that Ruleth hemself and others by his own Appetite and Affections of all Creatures is the worst and of all Beasts is the most furious and dangerous for that nothing is so outragious as Injustice armed and no Armor is so strong as Wit and Authority Councils the second Help why given The Monarchie of ENGLAND tempered The second Help that Common-wealths do assign to their Kings and Princes be certain Councils as we see the Parlament of England and France the Courts in Spain and Diets in Germanie without which no matter of great Moment can be concluded And besides this commonly every King hath his Privie Council whom he is bound to hear and this was done to temper somwhat the absolute Form of a Monarchie whose danger is by reason of his sole Authoritie to fall into Tyrannie as Aristotle noteth In the Monarchie of England all the Three Forms of Government do enter more or less In that there is one King or Queen it is a Monarchie In that it hath certain Councils which must be heard it participateth of Aristocratia And in that the Commonaltie have their Voices and Burgesses in Parlament it taketh part also of Democratia All which limitations come from the Common-wealth as having Authoritie above their Princes for the good of the Realm Restraint of Kings among the Romans Why Kinglie Government left in Rome This Restraint hath been in all Times and Countries as for example The Romans that began with Kings gave their Kings as great and absolute Authoritie as ours have now adaies but yet their next in Blood Succeeded them not of necessitie but new Kings were Chosen partlie by the Senate and partlie by the People So as of Three * most excellent Kings that ensued immediatelie after Romulus none were of the Blood nor yet Romans born but rather Strangers Chosen for their Virtue and Valor So for the neglecting of their Laws the Senators slew Romulus their first King and cut him in pieces and for the same reason expelled Tarquinius Superbus their last and all his Posteritie and with them the Name and Government of Kings which was changed in the Regiment of Consuls Restraint of Kings among the Grecians In Greece and namely among the Lacedemonians their Kings Authoritie was so restrained by certain Officers of the People called Ephori which commonly were five in number as they were not only chastened by them but also Deprived and somtimes put to death Restraint of Kings in Christendom In Germanie The Emperor can neither make War nor exact any Contribution of men or Money thereunto but by the free leave and Consent of all the States of the Germane Dyet or Parlament And for his Children or next in Kinn they have no action interest or pretence to Succeed but only by free Election if they shall be thought worthie Nay one of the chiefest Points that the Emperor must Swear at his entrance is this That he shall never go about to make the Dignitie of the Emperor Peculiar or Hereditarie to his Familie but leave it unto the Seven Electors free in their power to Chuse his Successor according to the Law made by the Pope Gregory the Fift and the Emperor Charles the Fourth in this behalf In Polonia and Bohemia The Kings of Polonia and Bohemia can neither do any thing of great Moment without the consent of certain principal men called Palatines or Castellans neither may their Children of next Blood Succeed except they be Chosen as in the Empire In Spain France and England In Spain France and England the Privileges of Kings are far more eminent both in the Power and Succession for their Authoritie is much more absolute and their next in Blood do ordinarily Succeed for as touching Authoritie it seemeth that the Kings of France and Spain have greater than the King of England for that everie Ordination of these Two Kings is Law in it self without further Approbation of the Common-wealth which holdeth not in England where no general Law can be made without Consent of Parlament But in the other Point of Succession the restraint is far greater in those other Two Countries than in England For in Spain the next in Blood cannot Succeed be he never so lawfully Discended but by a new Approbation of the Nobilitie Bishops and States of the Realm as it is expresly set down in the Two ancient Councils of Toledo the Fourth and Fifth Nor can the King of Spain's own Son at this day be called Prince except he be first Sworn by the said Nobilitie and Estates as we have seen it practiced in the King Philip's Children In France Women neither any of their Issue though Male are admitted to Succeed in the Crown And therefore was Edward 3d. of England though Son and Heir unto a Daughter of France which was left by her Three Brethren Sole Heir to King Phillip * the fair her Father put by the Crown As also was the King of Navar at the same time Son and Heir unto this Womans eldest Brothers Daughter named Lewis Huttin notwithstanding all their allegations And Philip de Valois a Brothers Son of Philip the fair's preferred to it by General Decree of the States of France and by Verdict of the whole Parlament of Paris And albeit the Law Salica
this Reign drew all England into factions and divisions the States in a Parlament at Wallingford made an agreement that Stephen should bee lawful during his life onely and that Henry and his off spring should succeed him and Prince William King Stephen's son was deprived and made onely Earl of Norfolke King John to the prejudice of his Nephew Arthur This Henry 2 left Richard Jeffrey and John Richard sirnamed Coeur de Lyon succeeded him and dying without issue * John was admitted by the States and Arthur Duke of Britaine son and heir to Jeffrey * excluded who coming afterward to get the Crown by war was taken by his Uncle John who murthered him in prison Louys Prince of France to the prejudice of King John and King John's son afterward to the prejudice again of Louys But som years after the Barons and States of England misliking the government of this King John rejected him again and chose Louys the Prince of France to bee their King and did swear fealtie to him in London depriving also the young Prince Henry John's son of 8 years old but upon the death of King John that ensued shortly after they recalled again that sentence disannulled the Oath and Allegiance made unto Louys Prince of France and admitted this Henry * to the Crown who reigned 53 years The Princes of York and Lancaster had their best Titles of the autoritie of the Common-wealth From this Henry 3. take their first begining the two branches of York and Lancaster In whose contentions the best of their titles did depend upon the autoritie of the Common-wealth For as the people were affected and the greatest part prevailed so were they confirmed or disannulled by Parlament And wee may not well affirm but that when they are in possession and confirmed therein by these Parlaments they are lawful Kings and that God concurreth with them For if wee should deny this point wee should shake the states of most Princes in the world at this day The Common-wealth may dispose of the Crown for her own good And so to conclude As propinquitie of blood is a great preheminencie towards the atteining of the Crown so doth it not ever binde the Common-wealth to yield thereunto and to shut up her eies or admit at hap-hazard or of necessitie any one that is next by succession but rather to take such an one as may perform the dutie and charge committed For that otherwise to admit him that is an enemie or unfit is but to destroy the Common-wealth and him together What are the principal points which a Common-wealth ought to respect in admitting or excluding of any Prince that pretendeth to succeed wherein is handled largely also of the diversitie of Religions and other such causes CAP. IX Seeing the Common-wealth is to know and judg of the matter no doubt but God doth allow of her judgment HEe who is to judg and give the sentence in the things is also to judg of the caus for thereof is hee called Judg So if the Common-wealth hath power to admit or put back the Prince or pretender to the Crown shee hath also autoritie to judg of the lawfulness of the causes considering specially that it is in their own affair and and in a matter that depend's wholly upon them for that no man is King or Prince by institution of Nature but only by authoritie of the Common-wealth Who can then affirm the contrary but that God doth allow for a just and sufficient cause in this behalf the only Will and Judgment of the Weal-publick it self supposing alwaies that a whole Realm will never agree by orderly way of Judgement to exclude the next Heir in Blood without a reasonable Cause in the sight and censure The Pope is to obey the Determination of the Common-wealth without further inquisition except it be in Cases of injustice and Tyranny And seeing that they only are the Judges of this Case and are properly Lords and Owners of the whole business we are to presume that what they Determine is just and lawful though at one time they should Determine one thing and the contrary at another as they did often in England being led at different times by different motions and it is enough for every particular man to subject himself and obey simply their Determination without further inquisition except he should see that Open Injustice were done therein or God manifestly offended and the Realm endangered Open Injustice if not the true Common-wealth but some Faction of wicked men should offer to Determine the matter without lawful authoritie God offended and the Realm endangered where it is evident that he that is preferred will do what lieth in him to the prejudice both of God's glory and of the Common-wealth as if a Turke or some notorious wicked man and Tyrant should be offred to Govern among Christians Whence the Reasons of Admitting or Receiving a Prince are to be taken Now to know the true Causes and principal Points which ought to be chiefly regarded as well by the Common-wealth as by every particular man in the furthering or hindering any Prince we must return to the End wherefore Government was appointed which is to defend preserve and benefit the Common-wealth because from this Consideration are to be deduced all other Considerations for discerning a good or evil Prince For that whosoever is most likely to defend c. his Realm and Subjects he is most to be allowed and desired as most conform to the end for which Government was ordained And on the contrary side he that is least like to do this deserveth least to be preferred And this is the Consideration that divers Common-wealths had in putting back oftentimes Children and impotent People though next in blood from succession Three Chief Points to be regarded in every Prince And here shall be fitly remembred what Gerard recounteth of the King of France that in his Coronation he is new apparrelled three times in one day once as a Priest and then as a Judge and last as a King armed thereby to signifie three things committed to his charge first Religion then Justice then Manhood and Chivalrie which division seemeth very good and fit and to comprehend all that a Weal-Publick hath need of for her happie State and Felicity both in soul and bodie and for her end both supernatural and natural And therefore these seem to be the three Points which most are to be regarded in every Prince Why it is here principally treated of Religion For the latter two because they have been often had in Consideration in the Changes aforesaid and Religion whereof then scarce ever any question or doubt did fall in these actions rarely or never And because in these our dayes it is the principal Difference and chiefest Difficultie of all other and that also it is of it self the first and highest and most necessarie Point to be considered in the Admission of a Prince therefore it
shall principally be treated of in this place The Felicitie of the Soul is the chiefest End appointed to every Common-wealth First we are to suppose That the first and chiefest End that God and Nature appointed to every Common-wealth was not so much the temporal Felicitie of the Body as the everlasting of the Soul And consequently that all other things of this transitory life are ordained to serve and be directed to that higher End And this was not only revealed to the Jewes by holy Scripture but also unto the Gentiles and Heathens by the instinct and light of Nature it self What End Pagan Philosophers and Law-makers had in their doings For there was never yet Pagan Philosopher that wrote of framing a good Common-wealth neither Law-maker among them that left Ordinances for the same purpose Which besides the temporal end of directing things for the bodie had not special care also of matters appertaining to the minde to wit of nourishing and rewarding virtue and for restraining and punishing of vice and wickedness Institution of Sacrifices by Nature Examples of Noah and Job And Nature did not only teach man that he should serve God but also how he should serve him to wit That the chiefest and supremest honor that could be done unto him in this life was the honor of Sacrifice and Oblations which we see was practiced even in those first beginnings of the Law of Nature before the Levitical Law For so we read in Genesis of Noah That he made an Altar and offered Sacrifices to God upon the same of all the Beasts and Birds that he had in the Ark Odoratúsque est Dominus odorem suavitatis And the like of Job that was a Gentile and lived before Moses Sanctificabat filios consurgénsque diluculo offerebat holocausta per dies singulos Example of the Indians Religion the chief End of a Common-wealth and Magistrates Among the Indians also where never any notice of Moses Law came there was never any Nation sound that acknowledged not some kind of God and offered not some kinde of Sacrifice unto him And though both in distinguishing between false gods and the true God and in the means of honoring him they have fallen into most gross and infinite errors as also the Gentiles of Europe Asia and Africa yet it is evident hereby that by God and Nature the highest and chiefest End of a Common-wealth is Cultus Dei And consequently that the principal care and charge of a Prince and Magistrate even by Nature it self is to look thereunto As among the Antients both Jews and Gentiles their Kings and chief Magistrates for many ages were also Princes And divers learned men do hold that the Privilege and preeminence of Primogeniture consisted principally in this That the eldest Sons were Priests The same proved by Authorities Nulla est gens saith Cicero tam fera nulla tam immanis cujus mentem non imbuerit deorum colendorum Religio And Plutarch writing against a certain Atheist of his time saith thus If you travel far Countries you may chance to finde some Cities without Learning without Kings without Riches without Money But a Citie without Temples and without gods and Sacrifices no man yet hath ever seen And finally Aristotle having numbred divers things necessary to a Common-wealth addeth these words Quintum Primum Circa rem Divinam cultus quod sacerdotium Sacrificiúmque vocant The absurd Atheism of our time in Politicks And therefore we see how false and impious is the opinion of divers Atheists of our time who affirm That Religion ought not to be so greatly respected in a Prince as though it were his chiefest care or the matter of most importance in his Government False and impious opinion specially among Christians who have so much the greater obligation to take to heart this matter of Religion by how much greater light and knowledge they have of God And for this cause also in all the Princes Oaths taken at their Admission as before hath been * recited the first and principal point of all other is about Religion and maintenance thereof not only by themselves but also by their Lievtenants c. The Oath given by the Emperor Justinian to all his Governors to take at their Reception And the Civil Law yieldeth a very solemn Form of an Oath which the Emperor Justinian was wont to give to all his Governors c. of Countries c. before they could be admitted to their Charges which is as followeth Juro per Deum omnipotentem filium ejus unigenitum Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum Spiritum Sanctum per Sanctam gloriosam Dei genitricem semper-virginem Mariam per quatuor Evangelia quae in manibus meos teneo per Sanctos Archangelos Michaëlem Gabriëlem puram conscientiam germanúmque servitium me servaturum sacratissimis nostris Dominis Justiniano Theodosiae conjugi ejus occasione traditae mihi ab eorum pietate administrationis Et quod communicator sum sanctissimae Dei Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae nullo modo vel tempore adversabor ei nec alium quocunque permittam quantum possibilitatem habeam Et si verò non haec omnia servà vero recipiam omnia incommoda hìc in futuro seculo in terribili judicio magni Domini Dei salvatoris nostris Jesu Christi habebo partem cum Juda cum lepra Geizi cum tremore Cain in super poenis quae lege eorum pietatis continentur ero Subjectus Why Princes should be endued with Religion This Oath did all the Governors of Christian Countries take in old time By which Oath and the other Oaths which Emperors and Kings did make themselves at their admission about this point we may see that it is their chiefest and highest end and office to assist their Subjects to the attaining of their supernatural end by knowing and serving God in this life For that otherwise God should draw no other fruit or commodity out of humane Common-wealths than of an assembly of brutish creatures He that wanteth it is guilty of high Treason against God And therefore whatsoever Prince or Magistrate doth not help his Subjects to this end omitteth the first and principal part of his charge and committeth high Treason against his Lord and Master in whose place he is and consequently is not fit for that place and dignitie though he should perform the other two parts of Justice and Valor never so well Lack of Religion the chiefest Cause and justest to exclude a Prince Whereof it ensueth That nothing in the world can so justly exclude an Heir apparent from his Succession as want of Religion nor any cause whatsoever justifie and clear the conscience of the Common-wealth or of particular men that in this cause should resist his entrance as if they judge him faultie in this point If a Marriage may be dissolved