Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
death_n brother_n york_n youth_n 17 3 7.7382 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A56468 A conference about the next succession to the crown of England divided into two parts : the first containeth the discourse of a civil lawyer, how and in what manner propinquity of bloud is to be preferred : the second containeth the speech of a temporal lawyer about the particular titles of all such as do, or may, pretend (within England or without) to the next succession : whereunto is also added a new and perfect arbor and genealogy of the descents of all the kings and princes of England, from the Conquest to the present day, whereby each mans pretence is made more plain ... / published by R. Doleman. Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.; Allen, William, 1532-1594.; Englefield, Francis, Sir, d. 1596? 1681 (1681) Wing P568; ESTC R36629 283,893 409

There are 24 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Swinford two of them that is Thomas Duke of Exeter and Henry Cardinal and Bishop of Winchester dyed without Issue John the eldest Son that was Earl of Somerset had Issue two Sons John and Edmond John that was Duke of Somerset had Issue one onely Daughter named Margaret who was married to Edmond Tidder Earl of Richmond by whom he had a Son named Henry Earl also of Richmond who after was afterwards made King by the name of Henry the VII and was Father to King Henry the VIII and Grandfather to the Queens Majesty that now is And this is the issue of John the first Son to the Duke of Somerset Edmond the second Son to John Earl of Somerset was first Earl of Mortaine and then after the death of his Brother John who dyed without Issue make as hath been said was created by King Henry the VI. Duke of Somerset and both he and almost all his Kin were slain in the quarrel of the said King Henry the VI. and for defence of the House of Lancaster against York For First this Edmond himself was slain in the battel of S. Albans against Richard Duke and first Pretender of York in the Year 1456. leaving behind him three goodly Sons to wit Henry Edmond and John whereof Henry succeeded his Father in the Dutchy of Somerset and was taken and beheaded in the same quarrel at Exham in the Year 1463. dying without Issue Edmond likewise succeeded his Brother Henry in the Dutchy of Somerset and was taken in the battel of Tewkesbury in the same quarrel and there beheaded the 7 th of May 1471. leaving no Issue John also the third Brother Marquess of Dorset was slain in the same battel of Tewkesbury and left no Issue and so in these two Noblemen ceased utterly all the Issue Male of the Line of Lancaster by the Children of John of Gaunt begotten upon Lady Swinford his third Wife So that all which remained of this Woman was only Margaret Countess of Richmond Mother to King Henry the VII which King Henry the VII and all that do descend from him in England do hold the Right of Lancaster only by this third Marriage of Catharine Swinford as hath been shewed and no ways of Blanch the first Wife or of Constance the second and this is enough in this place of the Descents of John of Gaunt and of the House of Lancaster and therefore I shall now pass over to shew the Issue of the House of York I touched briefly before how Edmond Langley Duke of York fourth Son of King Edward the III. had two Sons Edward Earl of Rutland and Duke of Aumarle that succeeded his Father afterwards in the Dutchy of York and was slain without children under King Henry the V. in the battel of Agenc●urt in France and Richard Earl of Cambridge which married Lady Anna Mortimer as before hath been said that was Heir of the House of Clarence to w●t of Leonel Duke of Clarence second son to King Edward the III. by which marriage he joyned together the two Titles of the Second and Fourth S●●● of King Edward and being himself convinced of a Conspiracy against King Henry the V. was put to death in Southampton in the Year of Christ 1415. and 3 d. of the Reign of King Henry the V. and 5 th day of August This Richard had Issue by Lady Anna Mortimer a Son named Richard who succeeded his Uncle Edward Duke of York in the same Dutchy and afterwards finding himself strong made claime to the Crown in the behalf of his Mother and declaring himself Chief of the Faction of the White Rose gave occasion of many cruel battels against them of the Red Rose and House of Lancaster and in one of the battels which was given in the Year 1460. at Wakefield himself was slain leaving behind him three Sons Edward George and Richard whereof Edward was afterwards King of England by the name of Edward the IV. George was Duke of Clarence and put to death in Calis in a butt of Sack or Malmesy by the Commandment of the King his Brother and Richard was Duke of Glocester and afterwards King by murthering his own two Nephews and was called King Richard the III. Edward the Eldest of these three Brothers which afterwards was King had Issue two Sons Edward and Richard both put to death in the Tower of London by their Cruel Uncle Richard he had also five Daughters the last four whereof I do purposely omit for that of none of them there remaineth any Issue but the eldest of all named Elizabeth was married to King Henry the VI. of the House of Lancaster and had by him Issue King Henry the VIII and two Daughters the one married unto Scotland whereof are descended the King of Scots and Arabella and the other married to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk whereof are issued the Children of the Earls of Hartford and Darby as after more at large shall be handled and this is the Issue of the first Brother of the House of York The Second Brother George Duke of Clarence had Issue by his Wife Lady Isabel Heir to the Earldoms of Warwick and Salisbury one Son named Edward Earl of Warwick who was put to death afterwards in his Youth by King Henry the VII and left no Issue this Duke George had also one Daughter named Margaret admitted by King Henry the VIII at what time he sent her into Wales with Princess Mary to be Countess of Salisbury but yet married very meanly to a Knight of Wales named Sir Richard Poole by whom she had four Sons Henry Arthur Geffrey and Reginald the last whereof was Cardinal and the other two Arthur and Geffrey had Issue for Arthur had two Daughters Mary and Margarit Mary was married to Sir John Stanny and Margaret to Sir Thomas Fitzherbert Sir Geffrey Poole had also Issue another Geffrey Poole and he had Issue Arthur and Geffrey which yet live Now then to return to the first Son of the Countess of Salisbury named Henry that was Lord Montague and put to death both he and his mother by King Henry the VIII This man I say left two daughters Catharine and Winefred Catharine was married to Sir Francis Hastings Earl of Huntington by which Marriage issued Sir Henry Hastings now Earl of Huntington and Sir George Hastings his brother who hath divers Children And Winefred the younger daughter was married to Sir Thomas Barrington Knight who also wanteth not Issue and this is of the second Brother of the House of York to wit of the Duke of Clarence The third Brother Richard Duke of Gloucester and afterward King left no Issue so as this is all that is needful to be spoken of the House of York in which we see that the first and principal Competitor is the King of Scots and after him Arabella and the Children of the Earls of Hertford and Derby are also Competitors of the
before hath been declared and preferreth it self in degree of Propinquity not only before the aforesaid two Houses of Scotland and Clarence but also before this other part of the House of Suffolk I mean the Family of Hartford though descended of the elder Daughter for that the Countess of Darby doth hold her self one degree nearer in descent than are the other Pretenders of Hartford as hath been shewed And albeit there want not many Objections and Reasons of some against this pretence of the House of Darby besides that which I have touched before yet for that they are for the most part personal Impediments and do not touch the right or substance of the title or any other important reason of State concerning the Common-wealth but only the mislike of the persons that pretend and of their Life and Government I shall omit them in this place for that as in the beginning I promised so I shall observe as much as in me lies to utter nothing in this Conference of ours that may justly offend and much less touch the Honour and Reputation of any one Person of the Bloud-Royal of our Realm when the time of admitting or excluding cometh then will the Realm consider as well of their Persons as of their Rights and will see what account and satisfaction each person hath given of his former life and doings and according to that will proceed as is to be supposed But to me in this place it shall be enough to treat of the first point which is of the Right and Interest pretended by way of Succession And so with this I shall make an end of these Families and pass over to others that do yet remain CHAP. VII Of the Houses of Clarence and Britany which contain the ●laims of the Earl of Huntington with the Pooles as also of the Lady Infanta of Spain and others of those Families HAving declared the Claims Rights and Pretences which the two Noble Houses of Scotland and Suffolk descended of the two Daughters of King Henry VII have or may have to the Succession of England with intention afterward to handle the House of Portugal apart which pretendeth to comprehend in it self the whole Body or at l●ast the first and principal Branch of the ancient House of Lancaster it shall not be amiss perhaps by the way to treat in this one Chapter so much as appertaineth to the two several Houses of Clarence and Britany for that there is less to be said about them then of the other And first of all I am of opinion that the Earl of Huntington and such other pretenders as are of the House of York alone before the Conjunction of both Houses by King Henry VII may be named to be of the House of Clarence and so for distinction sake I do name them not to confound them with the Houses of Scotland and Suffolk which are term●d also by the Lancastrians to be of the House of York alone for that they deny them to be of the true House of Lancaster but principally I do name them to be of the House of Clarence for that indeed all their Claim and Title to the Crown doth des●end from George Duke of Clarence as before in the third Chapter and elsewhere hath been declared which Duke George being Brother to King Edward IV. and put to death by his order left Issue Edward Earl of Warwick and of Salisbury who was put to death by King Henry VII in his youth and Margaret Countess of Salisbury which Margaret had Issue by Sir Richard Poole Henry Poole Lord Montague afterwards beheaded and he again Katharine married to Sir Francis Hastings Earl of Huntington by whom she had Sir Henry Hastings now Earl of Huntington Sir George Hastings his Brother yet living and others So as the Earl of Huntington with his said Brethren are in the fourth degree from the said George Duke of Clarence to wit his Nephews twice removed The said Margaret Countess of Salisbury had a younger Son also named Sir Geffrey Poole who had Issue another Geffrey and this Geffrey hath two Sons alive at this day in Italy named Arthur and Geffrey who are in the same degree of distance with the said Earl of Huntington saving that some alledge for them that they do descend all by male-kind from Margaret and the Earl pretendeth by a Woman whereof we shall speak afterwards Hereby then it is made manifest how the Earl of Huntington cometh to pretend to the Crown of England by the House of York only which is no other indeed but by the debarring and disabling of all other former Pretenders not only of Portugal and of Britany as strangers but also of the Houses of Scotland and Suffolk that hold likewise of the House of York and for the Reasons and Arguments which in the former two Chapters I have set down in particular against every one of them and shall hereafter also again those that remain which Arguments and Objections or any of them if they should not be found sufficient to exclude the said other Houses then is the Claim of this House of Huntington thereby made void for that it is as we see by the younger Child of the House of York that is to say by the second Brother So as if either the pretence of Lancaster in general be better than that of Yo●k or if in the House of York it self any of the forenamed Pretenders descended from King Edward IV. as of the elder Brother may hold or take place then holdeth not this title of Clarence for that as I have said it coming from the younger Brother must needs be grounded only or principally upon the barring and excluding of the rest that joyntly do pretend Of which Bars and Exclusions laid by this House of Clarence against the rest for that I have spoken sufficiently in the last two Chapters going before for so much as toucheth the two Houses of Scotland and Suffolk and shall do afterwards about the other two of Britany and Portugal I mean in this place to omit to say any more therein and only to consider what the other Competitors do alledge against this House of Clarence and especially against the pretence of the Earl of Huntington as chief Titler thereof for to the excluding of him do concur not only those other of opposite Houses but also the Pooles of his own House as now we shall see First th●n the contrary Houses do alledge generally against all this House of Clarence that seeing their Claim is founded only upon the Right of the Daughter of George Duke of Clarence second Brother to King Edward IV. evident it is that so long as any lawful Issue remaineth of any elder Daughter of the said King Edward the elder Brother as they say much doth and cannot be denied no Claim or Pretence of the younger Brothers Daughter can be admitted And so by standing upon this and answering to the Objections alledged before against the
Bastardies or other particular impediments that may have fallen upon each discent or branch thereof all these things said he may alter the course of common supposed right in him or her that is taken to be next in bloud as proving them not to be truly and lawfully the nearest though they be the next in degree As for example said he the whole multitude of competitors or pretendors which I conceive may come in consideration or have action or claim to the Crown after her Majesty that now is may be reduced to three or four first heads or principal stocks to wit to the House of Lancaster a part as descended of John of Gant Duke of Lancaster by his first Wife Blanch sole Heir of the Dutchess of Lancaster And of this branch or stock the most known off spring in these our days are those Princes that are lineally descended of Don Juan the first sirnamed de bona memoria tenth King of Portugal who married with Philippa the eldest Daughter of the said John of Gant by his first Wife Blanch and these Princes are King Philip of Spain now King also of Portugal and the Duke of Parma and Braganza who descended of the same race as also the Duke of Savoy on degree after them The second stock is of the house of York a part descended of George the Duke of Clarence second Brother to King Edward the fourth who being put to death by the Kings order in Cales left a daughter by whom were descended the Earl of Huntington with his Brothers which also have children and the off spring of Geffry Pole and Sir Thomas Barrington who married the other Sister of her that was married to the Hastings The third stock was in King Henry the seventh who being himself of the house of Lancaster and marrying the eldest daughter of Edward the fourth of the house of York is presumed to have joyned these two houses together and from this man by his two daughters for of his Son who was King Henry the eighth there remaineth only the Queen that now is there hath proceeded the house of Scotland divided into the families of the King of Scots and Arabella as also the Progeny of the two Earls yet living of Hartford and Darby Vnto these three heads which are commonly known to all men some of our days do add also a fourth which may seem more ancient then either of these three to wit by the Duke of Britany who are descended divers ways of the bloud royal of England as may easily be declared whose Heir at this day by lineal descent is the Infanta of Spain named Dona Isabella Clara Eugenia daughter to King Philip. So that hereby we come to discover no less then ten or eleven families that may pretend and have all of them friends in England and else where as yesterday I told you who do not fail in secret to negotiate and lay plots for them for that there are none of these so far off but to their friends it seemeth the times standing as they do that reasons may be given for their preferment and good hope conceived of prevailing You do well to add said a Captain there present the times standing as they do or at leastwise as they are like to stand when this matter must come to tryal at what time I believe not you Lawyers but we Souldiers must determine this title and then no doubt if there were not only these ten by you named but twenty more also of the Bloud Royal that would pretend and had friends and money to stand by them we should admit their causes to examination and perhaps give sentence for him that by your laws would soonest be excluded for when matters come to snatching it is hard to say who shall have the better part I do not add this circumstance of the time said the Lawyer as though it were the only or principal point which maketh doubtful the matter of Succession though I confess that helpeth thereunto greatly in respect of the great variety of mans affections at this day in Religion which do decline them commonly to judge for him whom they best love but besides this I do say that were the times never so quiet and Religion never so uniform yet are there great doubts in many mens heads about the lawfulness of divers Petitions of the Families before-named but if you add unto this the said wonderful diversity in matters of Religion also which this time yieldeth you shall find the event much more doubtful and consequently it is no marvel though many may remain in hope to prevail seeing that where many are admitted to stand for a preferment there divers may have propability also of speeding An example you may take said the Civilian Lawyer in the Roman Conclave at the Popes election where among three or four score Cardinals that enter in for Electors few there are that have not hope also to be elected not for that they see themselves all well qualified as others but because often times when divers that are more forward by likelyhood cannot be agreed upon it falleth to the lot of him that is farthest off and so it may among your pretenders quoth he in England Your example said the Temporal Lawyer confirmeth somewhat of that I mean though it be not altogether in like matter or manners for that the Pope is made by Election and here we talk of a King by Succession Your Succession said the Civilian includeth also an Election or approbation of the common-wealth and so doth the succession of all Kings in Christendom besides as well appeareth by the manner of their new admision at their Coronations where the people are demanded again if they be content to accept such a man for their King though his title of nearness by bloud be never so clear And therefore much more it is like to be in this case of English pretenders now where their lawful nearness in bloud is so doubtful as you have signified and so I do come to confirm your former proposition of the doubtfulness of the next Successor in England with another reason besides that which you have alledged of the ambiguity of their true propinquity in bloud for I say further that albeit the nearness of each mans succession in bloud were evidently known yet were it very uncertain as things now stand in England and in the rest of Christendom round about who should prevail for that it is not enough for a man to be next only in bloud thereby to pretend a Crown but that other circumstances also must concur which if they want the bare propinquity or ancestry of bloud may justly be rejected and he that is second third fourth fifth or last may lawfully be preferred before the first and this by all Law both divine and human and by all reason conscience and custom of all Christian Nations To this said the temporal Lawyer you go further Sir then
shall now begin to make more particular declaration taking my beginning from the Children of King Edward the third who were the causers of this fatal dissention CHAP. III. Of the succession of English Kings from King Edward the third unto our days with the particular causes of dissention between the Families of York and Lancaster more largely declared KIng Edward the third surnamed by the English the Victorious though he had many Children whereof some died without Issue which appertain not to us to treat of yet had he five Sons that left Issue behind them to wit Edward the eldest that was Prince of Wales surnamed the Black Prince Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son John of Gaunt so called for that he was born in that City that was the third Son and by his Wife was Duke of Lancaster and fourthly Edmond surnamed of Langley for that he was also born there and was Duke of York and last of all Thomas the fifth Son surnamed of Woodstock for the same reason of his birth and was Duke of Gloucester All these five Dukes being great Princes and Sons of one King left Issue behind them as shall be declared and for that the descendents of the third and fourth of these Sons to wit of the Dukes of Lancaster and York came afterward to strive who had best Title to Reign thereof it came that the controversie had his name of these two Families which for more distinction sake and the better to be known took upon them for their Ensigns a Rose of two different colours to wit the White Rose and the Red as all the World knoweth whereof the White served for York and the Red for Lancaster To begin then to shew the Issue of all these five Princes it is to be noted that the two elder of them to wit Prince Edward and his second Brother Leonel Duke of Clarence dyed both of them before King Edward their Father and left each of them an Heir for that Prince Edward left a Son named Richard who Succeeded in the Crown immediately after his Grand-father by the name of King Richard the second but afterward for his evil Government was deposed and dyed in prison without Issue and so was ended in him the Succession of the first Son of King Edward The second Son Leonel dying also before his Father left behind him one only Daughter and Heir named Philippa who was married to one Edmond Mortimer ●arl of March and he had by her a Son and Heir named Roger Mortimer which Roger had Issue two Sons named Edmond and Roger which dyed both without Children and one daughter named Anne Mortimer who was married unto Richard Plantagenet Earl of Cambridge second Son unto Edmond Langly Duke of York which Duke Edmond was fourth Son as hath been said unto King Edward the third and for that this Richard Plantagenet married the said Anne as hath been said hereby it came to pass that the House of York joyned two titles in one to wit that of Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son of King Edward the third and that of Edmond Langly Duke of York which was the fourth Son and albeit this Richard Plantagenet himself never came to be Duke of York for that he was put to death while his elder Brother lived by King Henry the fifth for a conspiracy discovered in Southampton against the said King when he was going over into France with his Army yet he left a Son behind him named also Richard who afterward came to be Duke of York by the death of his Uncle which Uncle was slain soon after in the Batte● of Age●cou●t in France and this Richard began first of all to prosecute openly his quarrel for the Title of the Crown against the House of Lancaster as a little afterward more in particuler shall be declared as also shall be shewed how that this 2 Richard Duke of York being slain also in the same quarrel left a Son named Edward Earl of March who after much trouble got to be King by the name of King Edward the 4 by the oppression and putting down of King Henry the 6 of the House of Lancaster and was the first King of the House of York whose Genealogy we shall lay down more largely afterwards in place convenient And now it followeth in order that we should speak of John of Gaunt the third Son but for that his descent is great I shall first shew the descent of the fifth and last Son of King Edward who was Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester and Earl of Buckingham that was put to death afterward or rather murthered wrongfully by order of his Nephew King Richard the second and he left only one daughter and Heir named Anne who was married to the Lord Stafford whose Family afterward in regard of this marriage came to be Dukes of Buckingham and were put down by King Richard the third and King Henry the eighth albeit some of the bloud and name do remain yet still in England And thus having brought to an end the Issue of three Sons of King Edward to wit of the first second and fifth and touched also somewhat of the fourth there resteth to prosecute more fully the Issues and descents of the third and fourth Sons to wit of John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster and of Edmond Langly Duke of York which are the Heads of these two Noble Families which thing I shall do in this place with all brevity and perspicuity possible beginning first with the House of Lancaster John of Gaunt third Son of King Edward being Duke of Lancaster by his Wife as hath been said had three Wives in all and by every one of them had issue though the Bishop of Ross in his great Latine Arbour of the Genealogies of the Kings of England Printed in Paris in the year 1580. assigneth but one Wife only to this John of Gaunt and consequently that all his Children were born of her which is a great and manifest errour and causeth great confusion in all the rest which in his Book of the Queen of Scots Title he buildeth hereon for that it being evident that only the first Wife was Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and John of Gaunt Duke thereof by her it followeth that the Children only that were born of her can pretend properly to the inheritance of that house and not others born of John of Gaunt by other wives as all the World will confess First then as I have said this John of Gaunt married Blanch Daughter and Heir of Henry Duke of Lancaster and had by her one Son only and two Daughters The Son was called Henry Earl first of Darby and after made Duke of Hereford by King Richard the second and after that came to be Duke also of Lancaster by the death of his Father and lastly was made King by the deposition of his Cousen German the said King
what Historiographers do say according to their affections or Interests as what reasons and proofs be alledged of every side for that by this we shall more easily come to judge where the right or wrong doth lie First therefore the defenders of the House of York do alledge that their title is plain and evident for that as in the former chapter hath been declared Richard Duke of York first pretender of this House whose Father was Son to Edmond Langley Duke of York fourth Son of King Edward the third and his Mother Anne Mortimer that was Neece once removed and sole Heir to Leonel Duke of Clarence second Son of the said King Edward this Richard I say Duke of York pretended that for so much as he had two titles joyned together in himself and was lawful Heir as well to Duke Leonel the second Brother as to Duke Edmond the fourth that he was to be preferred in Succession of the Crown after the death of King Richard the second Heir of the first Son of King Edward before the Issue of John of Gaunt that was but third Son to the said King Edward and consequently that Henry Bolenbrok John of Gaunts Son Duke of Lancaster called afterwards King Henry the fourth entred the Crown by tyranny and violonce first for deposing the true and Lawful King Richard and secondly for taking the Kingdom upon himself which Kingdom after the death of the foresaid King Richard which happened in the year 1399. belonging to Edmond Mortimer Earl of March then living and after his death to Anne Mortimer his Sister married to Richard Earl of Cambridge Father to this Richard pretendent Duke of York as hath been said for that this Edmond and Anne Mortimer were Children to Roger Mortimer Son of Philip that was daughter to Duke Leonel which Leonel was elder Uncle to King Richard and before John of Gaunt the younger Brother whose Son took the Crown upon him For the better understanding of which pretence and allegation of the House of York against Lancaster we must note the story following to wit That King Edward the III. seeing in his old age that Prince Edward his eldest Son whom of all his Children he loved most dearly was dead though there wanted not much doubt in some mens heads as after shall be shewed who ought to succeed yet the old man for the exceeding great affection he bare to the dead Prince would hear nothing in that behalf but appointed Richard the said Prince Edwards only Son and Heir to succeed him in the Kingdom and made the same to be confirmed by Act of Parliament and inforced all his Children then alive to swear to the same which were John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster his third and eldest Son that then lived for Leonel his second Son Duke of Clarence was dead before and Edmond Langley and Thomas Woodstock Earls at that time but after Dukes of York and Glocester and so King Richard Reigned with good obedience of his Uncles and their Children for 20 years together but in the end when he grew insolent and had put to death his Uncle the Duke of Glocester together with the Earl of Arundel and banished many others of the Nobility and among them the Archbishop of Canterbury as also his own Cousin-German Henry Duke of Hertford and after of Lancaster Son and Heir of John of Gaunt and had made many wickedd Statutes as well against the Church and State Ecclesiastical as also to intangle the Realm and Nobility with fained crimes of Treason against his Regality as then he termed them the principal men of the Realm seeing a sit occasion offered by the Kings absence in Ireland called home out of France the foresaid Henry Duke of Lancaster with the Archbishop of Canterbury Earls of Arundel and Warwick and others which were in banishment and by common consent gathered upon the suddain such an Army to assist them in England as they took the King brought him to London and there in a Parliament laying together the intolerable faults of his Government they deprived him of all Regal Dignity as before they had done to his great Grandfather K. Edward the second and then by universal consent of the Parliament and people there present they chose and admitted the said Henry Duke of Lancaster to be their King who continued so all the days of his life and left the Crown unto his Son and Sons Son after him by the space of threescore years until this Richard before named Duke of York made challenge of the same in manner and form as before hath been shewed Now then the story being thus the question is first whether Richard the second were justly deposed or no and secondly whether after his deposition the House of York or House of Lancaster should have entred and thirdly if the House of Lancaster did commit any wrong or injustice at their first entrance to the Crown yet whether the continuance of so many years in possession with so many approbations and confirmations thereof by the Commonwealth were not sufficient to legitimate their right Concerning which points many things are alledged by the favourers of both Families and in the first point touching the lawfulness or unlawfulness of King Richards deposition three Articles especially do seem most considerable to wit about the thing in it self whether a lawful King may be deposed upon just causes and secondly about these causes in King Richards deposition to wit whether they were just or sufficient for deposition of the said King and lastly about the manner of doing i● whether the same were good and orderly or not And touching the first of these three points which is that a King upon just causes may be deposed I think both parties though never so contrary between themselves will easily agree and the Civil Lawyer seems to me to have proved it so evidently before throughout his whole dicourse as I think very little may be said against the same For he hath declared if you remember both by reason authority and examples of all Nations Christian that this may and hath and ought to be done when urgent occasions are offered And first by reason he sheweth it for that all Kingly authority is given them only by the Commonwealth and that with this express condition that they shall Govern according to Law and equity that this is the cause of their exaltation above other men that this is the end of their Government the butt of their authority the star and pole by which they ought to direct their stern to wit the good of the people by the weal of their Subjects by the benefit of the Realm which end being taken away or perverted the King becometh a Tyrant a Tyger a fierce Lion a ravening Wolf a publick enemy and a bloudy murtherer which were against all reason both natural and moral that a Common-wealth could not deliver it self from so eminent a destruction By authority also
young King of the bloud Royal was Crowned in her place and all this might have been done as you see without such trouble of Arms and bloud-shed if God would but he appointed these several means for working of his will and for relieving of Common-wealths oppressed by evil Princes And this seemeth sufficient proof to these men that King Richard of England might be removed by force of Arms his life and Government being so evil and pernicious as before hath been shewed It remaineth then that we pass to the second principal point proposed in the beginning which was that supposing this deprivation of King Richard was just and lawful what House by right should have succeeded him either that of Lancaster as it did or the other of York And first of all it is to be understood that at that very time when King Richard was deposed the house of York had no pretence or little at all to the Crown for that Edmond Mortimer Earl of March Nephew to the Lady Philippa was then alive with his Sister Anne Mortimer married to Richard Earl of Cambridge by which Anne the House of York did after make their claim but could not do so yet for that the said Edmond her Brother was living and so continued many years after as appeareth for that we read that he was alive 16. years after this to wit in the third year of the Reign of K. Henry the 5th when his said Brother in Law Richard Earl of Cambridge was put to death in Southampton whom this Edmond appeached as after shall be shewed and that this Edmond was now Earl of March when K. Richard was deposed and not his Father Roger as Polidor mistaketh is evident by that that the said Roger was slain in Ireland a little before the deposition of King Richard to wit in the year 1398. and not many months after he had been declared Heir apparent by King Richard and Rogers Father named Edmond also Husband of the Lady Philippa dyed some three years before him that is before Roger as after will be seen so as seeing that at the deposition of King Richard this Edmond Mortimer elder Brother to Anne was yet living the question cannot be whether the House of York should have entred to the Crown presently after the deprivation of King Richard for they had yet no pretence as hath been shewed but whether this Edmond Mortimer as Heir of Leonel Duke of Clarence or else Henry Duke of Lancaster Heir of John of Gaunt should have entred For as for the House of York there was yet no question as appeareth also by Stow in his Chronicle who seteth down how that after the said deposition of Richard the Archbishop of Canterbury asked the people three times whom they would have to be their King whether the Duke of York there standing present or not and they answered no and then he asked the second time if they would have his eldest Son the Duke of Aumarl and they said no he asked the third time if they would have his youngest Son Richard Earl of Cambridge and they said no Thus writeth Stow. Whereby it is evident that albeit this Earl of Cambridge had married now the Sister of Edmond Mortimer by whom his posterity claimed afterward yet could he not pretend at this time her Brother being yet alive who after dying without Issue left all his right to her and by her to the House of York for albeit this Earl Richard never came to be Duke of York for that he was beheaded by King Henry the fifth at Southampton as before hath been said while his elder Brother was a live yet left he a Son named Richard that after him came to be Duke of York by the death of his Uncle Edmond Duke of York that dyed without Issue as on the other side also by his Mother Ann Mortimer he was Earl of March and was the first of the House of York that made title to the Crown So that the question now is whether after the deposition of King Richard Edmond Mortimer Nephew removed of Leonel which Leonel was the second Son to King Edward or else Henry Duke of Lancaster Son to John of Gaunt which John was third Son to King Edward should by right have succeeded to King Richard and for Edmond is alledged that he was Heir of the elder Brother and of Henry is said that he was nearer by two degrees to the Stem or last King that is to say to King Richard deposed then Edmond was for that Henry was Son to King Richards Uncle of Lancaster and Edmond was but Nephew removed that is to say Daughters Sons Son to the said King Richards other Uncle of York And that in such a case the next in degree of consanguinity to the last King is to be preferred though he be not of the elder Line the favourers of Lancaster alledge many proofs whereof some shall be touched a little after and we have seen the same practised in our days in France where the Cardinal of Bourbon by the Judgment of the most part of that Realm was preferred to the Crown for his propinquity in bloud to the dead King before the King of Navarre though he were of the elder Line Moreover it is alledged for Henry that his title came by a man and the others by a woman which is not so much favoured either by Nature Law or Reason and so they say that the pretenders of this title of Lady Philippa that was daughter of Duke Leonel never opened their mouths in those days to claim until some 50. years after the deposition and death of King Richard Nay moreover they of Lancaster say that sixteen years after the deposition of King Richard when King Henry the fifth was now in possession of the Crown certain Noblemen and especially Richard Larl of Cambridge that had married this Edmond Mortimers Sister offered to have slain King Henry and to have made the said Edmond Mortimer King for that he was descended of Duke Leonel but he refused the matter thinking it not to be according to equity and so went and discovered the whole Treason to the King whereupon they were all put to death in Southampton within four or five days after as before hath been noted and this happened in the year 1415. and from henceforward until the year 1451. and thirtieth of the Reign of King Henry the sixth which was 36. years after the Execution done upon these Conspirators no more mention or pretence was made of this matter at what time Richard Duke of York began to move troubles about it again Thus say those of the House of Lancaster but now these of York have a great argument for themselves as to them it seemeth which is that in the year of Christ 1385. and 9th year of the reign of King Richard the second it was declared by Act of Parliament as Polydor writeth that Edmond Mortimer who had married Philippa
that seeing rigour of Law runneth only with the Uncle for that indeed he is properly nearest in bloud by one degree and that only indulgence and custom serveth for the Nephew permitting him to represent the place of his Father who is dead they resolve I say that whensoever the Uncle is born before the Nephew and the said Uncle's elder Brother died before his Father as it happened in the case of John of Gaunt and of King Richard there the Uncle by right may be preferred for that the said elder Brother could not give or transmit that thing to his Son which was not in himself before his Father died and consequently his Son could not represent that which his Father never had and this for the Civil Law Touching our Common Laws the favourers of Lancaster do say two or three things first that the right of the Crown and interest thereunto is not decided expresly in our law nor is it a plea subject to the common rules thereof but is superiour and more eminent and therefore that men may not judge of this as of other pleas of particular persons nor is the Tryal alike nor the common maxims or rules always of force in this thing as in others which they prove by divers particular cases as for example the Widow of a private man shall have her thirds of all his Lands for her Dowry but not the Queen of the Crown Again if a private man have many daughters and die seized of Lands in Fee-simple without Heir Male his said daughters by law shall have the said Lands as co-partners equally divided between them but not the daughters of a King for that the eldest must carry away all as though she were Heir male The like also is seen if a Baron match with a Feme that is an Inheritrix and have Issue by her though she die yet shall he enjoy her Lands during his life as Tenant by courtesie but it is not so in the Crown if a man marry with a Queen as King Philip did with Queen Mary and so finally they say also that albeit in private mens possessions the common course of our law is that if the Father die seized of Land in Fee-simple leaving a younger Son and a Nephew that is to say a Child of his Elder Son the Nephew shall succeed his Grandfather as also he shall do his Uncle if of three Brethren the elder die without Issue and the second leave a Son yet in the inheritance and succession of the Crown it goeth otherwise as by all the fotmer eight examples have been shewed and this is the first they say about the common law The second point which they affirm is that the ground of our Common Laws consisteth principally and almost only about this point of the Crown in custom for so say they we see by experience that nothing in effect is written thereof in the common law and all old Lawyers do affirm this point as were Ranulfus de Granvilla in his books of the laws and customs of England which he wrote in the time of King Henry the second and Judge Fortescue in his book of the praise of English laws which he compiled in the time of King Henry the sixth and others Whereof these men do infer that seeing there are so many presidents and examples alledged before of the Uncles case preferred before the Nephew not only in foreign Countries but also in England for this cause I say they do affirm that our common laws cannot but favour also this title and consequently must needs like well of the interest of Lancaster as they avouch that all the best old Lawyers did in those times and for example they do Record two by name of the most famous learned men which those ages had who not only defended the said title of Lancaster in those days but also suffered much for the same The one was the forenamed Judge Fortescue Chancellor of England and named Father of the common laws in that age who fled out of England with the Queen Wife of King Henry the sixth and with the Prince her Son and lived in banishment in France where it seemeth also that he wrote his learned book intituled de laudibus legum Angliae And the other was Sir Thomas Thorpe chief Baron of the Exchequer in the same Reign of the same King Henry the sixth who being afterward put into the Tower by the Princes of the House of York for his eager defence of the title of Lancaster remained there a long time and after being delivered was beheaded at High-gate in a tumult in the days of King Edward the fourth These then are the allegations which the favourers of the House of Lancaster do lay down for the justifying of the title affirming first that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster ought to have succeeded his Father King Edward the third immediately before King Richard and that injury was done unto him in that King Richard was preferred And secondly that King Richard were his right never so good was justly and orderly deposed for his evil Government by lawful authority of the Commonwealth And thirdly that after his deposition Henry Duke of Lancaster Son and Heir of John of Gaunt was next in succession every way both in respect of the right of his Father as also for that he was two degrees nearer to the King deposed then was Edmond Mortimer descended of Leonel Duke of Clarence and these are the principal and substantial proofs of their right and title But yet besides these they do add all these other arguments and considerations following first that whatsoever right or pretence the House of York had the Princes thereof did forfeit and lose the same many times by their conspiracies rebellions and attainders as namely Richard Earl of Cambridge that married the Lady Anne Mortimer and by her took his pretence to the Crown was convicted of a conspiracy against King Henry the fifth in Southampton as before I have said and there was put to death for the same by Judgment of the King and of all his Peers in the year 1415. the Duke of York his elder Brother being one of the Jury that condemned him This Earl Richards Son also named Richard coming afterward by the death of his Uncle to be Duke of York first of all made open claim to the Crown by the title of York But yet after many oaths sworn and broken to King Henry the sixth he was attainted of Treason I mean both he and Edward his Son then Earl of March which afterward was King with the rest of his off-spring even to the ninth degree as Stow affirmeth in a Parliament holden at Coventry in the year 1459. and in the 38. year of the Reign of the said King Henry and the very next year after the said Richard was slain in the same quarrel but the House of Lancaster say these men was never attainted of any such
him and the Duke of York and solemnly sworn on both sides the 8 th of October in the year 1459 In punishment whereof and of his other negligent and evil Government though for his own particular Life he was a good man as hath been said Sentence was given against him partly by Force and partly by Law and King Edward the fourth was put in his place who was no evil King as all English-men well know but one of the renownedst for martial Acts and Justice that hath worn the English Crown But after this man again there fell another accident much more notorious which was That Richard Duke of Glocester this King Edward's younger Brother did put to death his two Nephews this man's Children viz. King Edward the 5 th and his little Brother and made himself King And albeit he sinned grieveously by taking the Crown in this wicked manner yet when his Nephews were once dead he might in reason seem to be lawful King both in respect that he was next Male in Bloud after his Brother as also for that by divers Acts of Parliament both before and after the death of those Infants his Title was authorized and made good and yet no man will say I think but that he was lawfully deposed again afterwards by the Commonwealth which called out of France Henry Earl of Richmond to chastize him and to put him down and so he did and took from him both Life and Kingdom in the Field and was King himself after him by the Name of King Henry the seventh And no man I suppose will say but that he was lawful King also which yet cannot be except the other might be lawfully deposed And moreover as I said at the beginning I would have you consider in all these mutations what men commonly have succeeded in the places of such as have been deposed as namely in England in the place of those five Kings before-named that were deprived viz. John Edward the second Richard the second Henry the sixth and Richard the third there have succeeded the three Henries to wit the third fourth and seventh and two Edwards the third and fourth all most rare and valiant Princes who have done infinite important Acts in their Commonwealths and among other have raised many Houses to the Nobility put down others changed States both abroad and at home distributed Ecclesiastical Dignities altered the course of Descent in the Bloud-Royal and the like all which was unjust and is void at this day if the changes and deprivations of the former Princes could not be made and consequently none of these that do pretend to the Crown of England at this day can have any Title at all because they descend from those men who were put up in place of the Deprived And this may be sufficient for proof of the two principal points which you required to be discussed in the beginning of this Speech viz. That lawful Princes have oftentimes by their Commonwealths been lawfully deposed for misgovernment and that God hath allowed of and assisted the same with good success unto the Weal-publick And if this be so or might be so in Kings lawfully set in possession then much more hath the said Commonwealth Power and Authority to alter the Succession of such as do but yet pretend to that Dignity if there be due reason and causes for the same which is the head point that first we began to treat of said the Civilian and with this ended he his Spech without saying any more CHAP. IV. Wherein consisteth principally the lawfulness of Proceeding against Princes which in the former Chapter is mentioned What Interest Princes have in their Subjects Goods or Lives How Oaths doth bind or may be broken by Subjects towards Princes And finally the difference between a good King and a Tyrant WHen the Civilian had ended his Speech the Temporal Lawyer looked upon the standers by to see whether any would reply or no and perceiving all to hold their peace he began to say in this manner Truly Sir I cannot deny but the examples are many that you have alledged and they seem to prove sufficiently that which you affirmed at the beginning to wit that the Princes by you named were deprived and put down by their Common-Wealths for their evil Government And good Successors commonly raised up in their places and that the Common-Wealth had Authority also to do it I do not greatly doubt at least wise they did it de facto and now to call those facts in question were to imbroyl and turn up-side-down all the states of Christendom as you have well signified but yet for that you have added this word Lawfuly so many times in the course of your narration I would you took the pains to tell us also by what Law they did the the same seeing that Belloy whom you have named before and some other of his opinion do afirm that albeit by nature the Commonwealth have authority over the Prince to choose and appoint him at the beginning as you have well proved out of Aristotle and other ways Yet having once made him and given up all their Authority unto him he is now no more Subject to their Correction or Restraint but remaineth Absolute of himself without respect to any but only to God alone which they prove by the example of every particular Man that hath Authority to make his Master or Prince of his Inferior but not afterwards to put him down again or to Deprive him of the Authority which he gave him though he should not bear himself well and gratefully but Discourteous rather and Injuriously towards him that gave him first this Authority To which also they do alledge the Speech of the Prophet Samuel in the first Book of the Kings where the People of Israel demanded to have a King to Govern over them as other Nations round about them had and to leave the Government of the High Priests under whom at that day they were At which demand both God himself and Samuel were grievously offended and Samuel by Gods express order protested unto them in this manner Well quoth he you will have a King hearken then to this that I will say Hoc erit jus regis qui imperaturus est vobis This shall be the Right and Power of the King that shall rule over you to wit He shall take from you your Children both Sons and Daughters your Fields and Vineyards your Harvest also and Rents your Servants Hand-maids and Herds of Cattel and shall give them to his Servants and you shall Cry unto God in that day from the face of this your King whom you have chosen and God shall not hear you for that you have demanded a King to Govern you Thus far the Prophet Out of all which discourse and Speech of the Prophet these Men do gather that a King is nothing so restrained in his Power or Limited to Law as you have affirmed but
the first Race for that it is evident by the Councils of Toledo before-alledged which were holden in that very time that in those days express Election was joined with Succession as by the deposition of King Suintilla and putting back of all his Children as also by the Election and Approbation of King Sisinando that was further off by Succession hath been insinuated before and in the Fifth Council of that age in Toledo it is decreed expressly in these words Si quis tali● meditatus fuerit talking of pretending to be King quem nec electio omnium perfecit nec Gothicae gentis nobilitas ad hunc honoris apicem trahit sit consortio Catholicorum privatus Divino anathemate condemnatus If any man shall imagin said these Fathers or go about to aspire to the Kingdom whom the Election and Choice of all the Realm doth not make perfect nor the Nobility of the Gothish Nation doth draw to the height of this Dignity let him be deprived of all Catholick Society and damned by the Curse of Almighty God By which words is insinuated that not only the Nobility of Gothish Bloud or nearness by Succession was required for the making of their King but much more the Choice or Admission of all the Realm wherein this Council putteth the Perfection of his Title The like determination was made in another Council at the same place before this that I have alledged and the words are these Nullus apud nos presumptione regnum arripiat sed defuncto in pace Principe optimates Gentis cum sacerdotibus successorem regni communi concilio constituant Which in English is thus Let no man with us snatch the Kingdom by presumption but the former Prince being dead in peace let the Nobility of the Nation together with the Priests and Clergy appoint the Successor of the Kingdom by Common Council Which is as much as to say as if he had said Let no man enter upon the Kingdom by presumption of Succession alone but let the Lords Temporal and Spiritual by common voice see what is best for the Weal-Publick Now then according to these antient Decrees albeit in the second race of Don Pelayo the Law of Succession by propinquity of Bloud was renewed and much more established than before as the antient Bishop of Tuys and Molina and other Spanish Writers do testify yet that the next in Bloud was oftentimes put back by the Commonwealth upon just causes these Examples following shall testify as briefly recounted as I can possibly Don Pelayo dyed in the Year of our Lord 737 left a son named Don Favilla who was King after his Father and Reigned two Years only After whose death none of his Children were admitted for King though he left divers as all Writers do testify But as Don Lucas the Bishop of Tuy a very antient Author writeth Aldefonsus Catholicus ab universo populo Gothorum eligitur that is as the Chronicler Moralis doth translate in Spanish Don Alonso sirnamed the Catholick was chosen to be King by all voices of the Gothish Nation This Don Alonso was son in Law to the former King Favilla as Morales saith for that he had his daughter Ermenesenda in Marriage and he was preferred before the King 's own Sons only for that they were young and unable to Govern as the said Historiographer testifyeth And how well this fell out for the Commonwealth and how excellent a King this Don Alonso proved Morales sheweth at large from the tenth chapter of his thirteenth Book unto the seventeenth and Sebastianus Bishop of Salamanca that lived in the same time writeth that for his Valiant Acts he was sirnam'd the Great To this Famous Don Alonso succeeded his son Don Fruela the first of that name who was a Noble King for ten Years space and had divers excellent Victories against the Moores but afterwards declining to Tyranny he became hateful to his Subjects and for that he put to death wrongfully his own Brother Don Vimerano a Prince of excellent parts and rarely beloved of the Spaniards he was himself put down and put to death by them in the Year of Christ 768 And albeit this King left two goodly children behind him which were lawfully begotten upon his Queen Dona Munia the one of them a son called Don Alonso and the other a daughter called Dona Ximea yet for the hatred conceived against their Father neither of them was admitted by the Realm to succeed him but rather his Cousin German named Don Aurelio brothers son to Don Alonso the Catholick was preferred and reigned peaceably six years and then dying without issue for that the hatred of the Spaniards was not yet ended against the memory of King Fruela they would not yet admit any of his Generation but rather excluded them again the second time and admitted a Brother in Law of his named Don Silo that was married to his sister Dona Adosinda daughter to the foresaid Noble King Catholick Alonso So that here we see twice the right Heirs of King Don Fruela for his evil Government were put back But Don Silo being dead without issue a● also Don Aurelio was before him and the Spaniards anger against King Fruela being now well asswaged they admitted to the Kingdom his foresaid son Don Alonso the younger sirnamed afterwards the Chast whom now twice before they had put back as you have seen but now they admitted him though his Reign at the first endured very little for that a certain bastard uncle of his named Don Mauregato by help of the Moores put him out and reigned by force six years and in the end dying without issue the matter came in deliberation again whether the King Don Alonso the chast that yet lived and had been hidden in a Monastery of Galatia during the time of the Tyrant should return again to Govern or rather that his Cousin-german Don Vermudo son to his Uncle the Prince Vimerano whom we shewed before to have been slain by this mans Father King Fruela should be elected in his place And the Realm of Spain determined the second to wit that Don Vermudo though he were much further off by propinquity of Bloud and within Ecclesiastical Order also for that he had been made Deacon● should be admitted partly for that he was judged for the more Valiant and Able Prince than the other who seemed to be made more acquainted now with the Life of Monks and Religious men than of a King having first been brought up among them for ten or twelve Years space whilst Don Aurelio and Don Silo reigned after the death of his Father King Fruela and secondly again other six Years during the Reign of the Tyrant Mauregato for which cause they esteemed the other to be fitter as also for the different memories of their two Fathers King Fruela and Prince Vimerano whereof the first was hateful and the
Stow that he had all mens Good-will and was Crowned as his Brother had been at Kingston by Odo Arch-bishop of Canterbury and Reigned nine years with great good will and praise of all men He dyed at last without Issue and so his Elder Nephew Edwin was admitted to the Crown but yet after four years he was deposed again for his lewd and vitious Life and his younger brother Edgar admitted in his place in the year of Christ 959 This King Edgar that entred by deposition of his Brother was one of the rarest Princes that the World had in his time both for Peace and War Justice Piety and Valour Stow saith he kept a Navy of three thousand and six hundred Ships distributed in divers Parts for defence of the Realm Also that he built and restored 47 Monasteries at his own Charges and did other many such Acts he was Father to King Edward the Martyr and Grandfather to King Edward the Confessor though by two different Wives for by his first Wife named Egilfred he had Edwar● after martyrized and by his second Wife Alfred he had Etheldred Father to Edward the Confessor and to the end that Etheldred might Reign his Mother Alfred caused King Edward the son of Egilfred to be slain after King Edgar her Husband was dead After this so shameful Murther of King Edward many good men of the Realm were of opinion not to admit the Succession of Etheldred his half Brother both in respect of the Murther of King Edward his elder Brother committed for his sake as also for that he seemed a man not fit to Govern and of this opinion among others was the Holy man Dunston Archbishop of Canterbury as Polidor saith who at length in flat words denyed to consecrate him but seeing the most part of the Realm bent on Etheldred's side he foretold them that it would repent them after and that in this man's Life the Realm should be destroyed as indeed it was and he ran away to Normandy and left Sweno and his Danes in possession of the Realm though afterwards Sweno being dead he returned again and dyed in London This Etheldred had two Wives the first Ethelgina an English Woman by whom he had Prince Edmund sirnamed Ironside for his great strength and valour who succeeded his Father in the Crown of England for a year and at his death left two Sons which after shall be named and besides this Etheldred had by his first Wife other two Sons Edwin and Adelston and one Daughter named Edgina all which were either slain by the Danes or dyed without issue The second Wife of Etheldred was called Emma Sister to Richard Duke of Normandy who was Grandfather to William the Conquerour to wit Father to Duke Robert that was Father to William so as Emma was great Aunt to this William and she bare unto King Etheldred two Sons the First Edward who was afterwards named King Edward the Confessor Alerud who was slain traiterously by the Earl of Kent as presently we shall shew After the death also of King Etheldred Queen Emma was married to the Dane King Canutus the first of that name sirnamed the Great that was King of England after Etheldred and Edmond Ironside his Son and to him she bare a Son named Hardica●utus who Reigned also in England before King Edward the Confessor Now then to come to our Purpose he that will consider the passing of the Crown of England from the death of Edmond Ironside elder Son of King Etheldred until the possession thereof gotten by William Duke of Normandy to wit for the space of 50 years shall easily see what authority the Commonwealth hath in such Affairs to alter titles of Succession according as publick necessity or utility stall require for thus briefly the matter passed King Etheldred seeing himself too weak for Sweno the King of Danes that was entred the Land fled with his Wife Emma and her two children Edward and Alerud unto her Brother Duke Richard of Normandy and there remained until the death of Sweno and he being dead Etheldred returned into England made a certain Agreement and Division of the Realm between him and Canutus the son of Sweno and so dyed leaving his eldest Son Edmond Ironside to succeed him who soon after dying also left the whole Realm to the said Canutus and that by plain Covenant as Canutus pretended that the Longest Liver should have all whereupon the said Canutus took the two Children of King Edmond Ironside named Edmond and Edward and sent them over into Sweedland which at that time was subject also unto him and caused them to be brought up honourably of which Two the Elder named Edmond dyed without issue but Edward was married and had divers Children as after shall be touched Etheldred and his Son Edmond being dead Canutus the Dane was admitted for King of England by the whole Parliament and Consent of the Realm and Crowned by Alerud Archbishop of Canterbury as Polidor saith and he proved an excellent King went to Rome and was allowed by that See also He did many Works of Charity shewed himself a good Christian and very loving and kind to Englishmen married Queen Emma an Englishwoman and Mother to King Edward the Confessor and had by her a Son named Hardicanutus and so dyed and was much mourned by the English after he had Reigned twenty Years though his entrance and Title was partly by Force and partly by Election as before you heard After this Canutus the First sirnamed the Great for that he was King jointly both of England Norway and Denmark was dead Polidor saith that all the States of the Realm met together at Oxford to consult whom they should make King and at last by the more part of Voices was chosen Herauld the first Son of Canutus by a Concubine by which Election we see injury was done to the Lineal Succession of three Parties first to the Sons of King Edmond Ironside that were in Sweedland then to the Princes of Edward and Alerud Sons to King Etheldred and Brothers to Ironside that were in Normandy and thirdly to Hardicanutus Son to Canutus by his Lawful Wife Emma to whom it was also assured at her Marriage that her Issue should succeed if she had any by Canutus After the death of this Harald who dyed in Oxford where he was elected within three years after his Election there came from Denmark Hardicanutus to claim the Crown that his Father and Brother had possessed before him of whose Coming Polidor saith libentissimis animis accipitur communique omnium consensu Rex dicitur He was received with great good-will of all and by common Consent made King and this was done by the States without any respect had of the Succession of those Princes in Normandy and Swedeland and who by birth were before him as hath been shewed and this is the second breach of Lineal Descent after Etheldred
But this Hardicanutus being dead also upon the sudden at a certain Banquet in Lambeth by London without issue within two years after his Coronation the States of the Realm had determined to chuse Aludred for their King who was younger Brother to Edward and for that cause sent for him out of Normandy as Polidor recounteth and had made him King without all doubt for that he was esteemed more Stirring and Valiant than his elder Brother Edward had not Earl Goodwin of Kent fearing the young man's stomach raised a strong Faction against him and thereupon also caused him to be traiterously murthered as he passed through Kent towards London nor had the State herein any respect to Antiquity of Bloud for that before Alfred were both his own elder Brother Prince Edward who after him was chosen King and before them both were Edmond and Edward the Children of their elder Brother Edmond Ironside as hath been said and this is the third Breach of Lineal Descent But this notwithstanding Alured being slain Prince Edward was made King tanta publica laetitta saith Polidor ut certatim pro ejus saelici Principatu cuncti vot a facerent That is He was made King with such universal joy and contentment of all men as every man contended who should pray and make most Vows to God for his happy Reign And according to this was the Success for he was a most Excellent Prince and almost miraculously he Reigned with great Peace and void of all War at home and abroad for the space of almost twenty years after so infinit Broils as had been before him and ensued after him and yet his Title by Succession cannot be justified as you see for that his eldest Brothers Son was then alive to wit Prince Edward sirnamed the Outlaw who in this Kings Reign came into England and brought his Wife and three lawful Children with him to wit Edgar Margaret and Christian but yet was not this good King Edward so scrupulous as to give over his Kingdom to any of them or to doubt of the Right of his own Title which he had by Election of the Commonwealth against the Order of Succession This King Edward being dead without issue Polidor saith that the States made a great Consultation whom they should make King and first of all it seemeth they excluded him that was only Next by Propinquity in Bloud which was Edgar Adelin Son to the said Prince Edward the Outlaw now departed and Nephew to King Edmond Ironside and the reason of this exclusion is alledged by Polidor in these words is puer id aetatis nondum regno gubernando maturus erat That is he being a Child of so small-years was not ripe enough to Govern the Kingdom And then he saith that Harald Son of Earl Goodwin by the Daughter of Canutus the First proclaimed himself King and moreover he addeth Non displicuit omnino id factum populo qui plurimum s●ei in Haraldi virtute habebat itaque more majorum sacratus est which is This fact of Harald displeased not at all the People of England for that they had great hope in the vertue of this Harald and so was he Anointed and Crowned according to the Fashion of the antient Kings of England By which words we may see that Harald had also the approbation of the Realm to be King notwithstanding that little Edgar was present as hath been said so as this was the fourth Breach of Succession at this time But in the mean space William Duke of Normandy pretended that he was chosen before by King Edward the Confessor and that the Realm had given their consent thereunto and that King Edward left the same testified in his last Will and Testament and albeit none of our English Authors do avow the same clearly yet do many other foreign Writers hold it and it seemeth very probable that some such thing had past both for that Duke William had many in England that did favour his Pretence at his entrance as also as Gerard in his French Story saith that at his first Coming to London he punished divers by name for that they had broken their Oaths and Promises in that behalf And moreover it appeareth that by alledging this Title of Election he moved divers Princes abroad to favour him in that Action as in a just Quarrel which is not like they should have done if he had pretended only a Conquest or his Title of Consanguinity which could be of no importance in the World for that effect seeing it was no other but that his Grandfather and King Edward's Mother were Brother and Sister which could give him no pretence at all to the Succession of the Crown by Bloud and yet wee see that divers Princes did assist him and among others the French Chronicler Gerard so often named before writeth that Alexander the second Pope of Rome whose Holiness was so much esteemed in those days as one Constantinus Afer wrot a Book of his Miracles being informed by Duke William of the Justness of his pretence did send him his Benediction and a precious Ring of Gold with an Hallowed Banner by which he got the Victory thus writeth Gerard in his French Chronicles and Antoninus Archbishop of Florence sirnamed Sainct writing of this matter in his Chronicles speaketh great good of William Conquerour and commendeth his Enterprize But howsoever this was the Victory we see he got and God prospered his Pretence and hath confirmed his Off-spring in the Crown of England more than 500. Years together So as now accounting from the the death of King Edmond Ironside unto this man we shall find as before I have said in less than 50 Years that 5. or 6. Kings were made in England one after another by only Authority and Approbation of the Commonwealth contrary to the ordinary Course of Lineal Succession by Propinquity of Blood And all this is before the Conquest but if we should pass any further down we should find more Examples than before For First the two Sons of the Conquerour himself that succeeded after him to wit William Rufus and Henry the I. were they not both younger Brothers to Robert Duke of Normandy to whom the most part of the Realm was inclined as Polydor saith to have given the Kingdom presently after the Conquerours death as due to him by Succession notwithstanding that William for particular displeasure against his elder Son had ordained the contrary in his Testament But that Robert being absent in the War of Hierusalem the Holy and Learned man Laufranke as he was accounted then Archbishop of Canterbury being deceived with vain hope of William Rufus's good nature perswaded them the contrary who was at that day of high Estimation and Authority in England and so might induce the Realm to do what he liked By like means got Henry his younger Brother the same Crown afterwards to wit by fair Promises to the
People and by help principally of Henry Newborow Earl of Warwick that dealt with the Nobility for him and Maurice Bishop of London with the Clergy for that Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury was in banishment Besides this also it did greatly help his cause that his elder Brother Robert to whom the Crown by right appertained was absent again this second time in the War of Jerusalem and so lost thereby his Kingdom as before Henry having no other Title in the World unto it but by Election and Admission of the People which yet he so defended afterwards against his said Brother Robert that came to claim it by the Sword and God did so prosper him therein as he to●k his said elder Brother Prisoner and so kept him for many Years until he dyed in Prison most pitifully But this King Henry dying left a Daughter behind him named Mawde or Mathilde which being married first to the Emperour Henry the V. he dyed without issue and then was she married again the second time to Geffry Plantagenet Earl of Anjow in France to whom she bare a Son named Henry his Grandfather caused to be declared for Heir Apparent to the Crown in his Days but yet after his decease for that Stephen Earl of Bollogne born of Adela Daughter to William the Conquerour was thought by the State of England to be more fit to Govern and to defend the Land for that he was at Mans age then was Prince Henry a Child of Maude his Mother he was admitted and Henry put back and this chiefly at the perswasion of Henry Bishop of Winchester Brother to the said Stephen as also by the Solicitation of the Abbot of Glassenbury and others who thought belike they might do the same with good Conscience for the good of the Realm though the event proved not so well for that it drew all England into Factions and Divisions for avoiding and ending whereof the States some Years after in a Parliament at Wal●ingford made an agreement that Stephen should be Lawful King during his Life only and that Henry and his Off-spring should succeed him and that Prince William King Stephen's Son should be deprived of his Succession to the Crown and made only Earl of Norfolk thus did the State dispose of the Crown at that time which was in the Year of Christ 1153. To this Henry succeeded by Order his Eldest son then living named Richard and sirnamed Cordelyon for his Valor but after him again the Succession was broken For that John King Henry's youngest Son to wit younger Brother to Richard whom his Father the King had left so unprovided as in jest he was called by the French Jean sens terre as if you would say S r John Lacke Land This man I say was after the death of his Brother Admitted and Crowned by the States of England and Arthur Duke of Britain Son and Heir to Geffery that was elder brother to John was against the ordinary course of Succession excluded And albeit this Arthur did seek to remedy the matter by War yet it seemed that God did more defend this Election of the Commonwealth than the right Title of Arthur by Succession for that Arthur was overcome and taken by King John though he had the King of France on his side and he dyed pitifully in prison or rather as most Authors do hold he was put to death by King John his Uncles own hands in the Castle of Roan thereby to make his Title of Succession more clear which yet could not be for that as well Stow in his Chronicle as also Matthew of Westminster and others before him do write that Geffrey besides this Son left two Daughters also by the Lady Constance his Wife Countess and Heir of Britaine which by the Law of England should have succeeded before John but of this small account seemed to be made at that day Some years after when the Barons and States of England misliked utterly the Government and proceeding of this King John they rejected him again and chose Luys the Prince of France to be their King and did swear Fealty to him in London as before hath been said and they deprived also the young Prince Henry his Son that was at that time but eight years old but upon the death of his Father King John that shortly after insued they recalled again that sentence and admitted this Henry to the Crown by the name of King Henry the III. and disanulled the Oath and Allegiance made unto Luys Prince of France and so King Henry Reigned for the space of 53. years afterwards the longest Reign as I think that any before or after him hath had in England Moreover you may know that from this King Henry the third do take their first beginning the two branches of York and Lancaster which after fell to so great contention about the Crown Into which if we would enter we should see plainly as before hath been noted that the best of all their titles after the deposition of King Richard the second depended on this authority of the Commonwealth for that as the People were affected and the greater part prevailed so were their titles either allowed confirmed altered or disanulled by Parliaments and yet may not we well affirm but that either part when they were in possession and confirmed therein by these Parliaments were lawful Kings and that God concurred with them as with true Princes for Government of their People For if we should deny this point as before hath been noted great inconveniencis would follow and we should shake the States of most Princes in the World at this day as by examples which alreay I have alledged in part may appear And with this also I mean to conclude and end this discourse in like manner affirming that as on the one side propinquity of Bloud is a great preheminence towards the attaining of any Crown so yet doth it not ever bind the Commonwealth to yield thereunto if weightier Reasons should urge them to the contrary neither is the Commonwealth bound always to shut her Eyes and to admit at hap-hazard or of necessity every one that is next by Succession of Bloud as Belloy falsly and fondly affirmeth but rather she is bound to consider well and maturely the Person that is to enter Whether he be like to perform his duty and charge committed unto him or no for that otherwise to admit him that is an enemy or unfit is but to destroy the Common-wealth and him together This is my opinion and this seemeth to me to be conform to all Reason Law Religion Piety Wisdom and Policy and to the use and custom of all well governed Common-wealths in the World Neither do I mean hereby to prejudice any Princes pretence or Succession to any Crown or Dignity in the World but rather do hold that he ought to enjoy his Preheminence but yet so that he be not prejudiciae thereby to the whole
and Chartres in France and the other two Polidor said dyed before they were Married and so their names were not Recorded These are the Children of King William the Conqueror among whom after his death there was much strife about the Succession For first his eldest Son Duke Robert who by order of Ancestrie by birth should have succeeded him in all his Estates was put back first from the Kingdom of England by his third Brother William Rufus upon a pretence of the Conquerors Will and Testament for particular affection that he had to this his said third Son William though as Stow Writeth almost all the Nobility of England were against William's entrance But in the end agreement was made between the two Brothers with the condition that if William should dye without Issue then that Robert should succeed him and to this accord both the Princes themselves and twelve principal Peers of each side were Sworn but yet after when William dyed without Issue this was not observed but Henry the fourth Son entred and deprived Robert not only of this his Succession to England but also of his Dukedom of Normandy that he had enjoyed peaceably before all the time of his Brother Rufus and moreover he took him Prisoner and so carried him into England and there kept him till his death which happened in the Castle of Cardif in the year 1134. And whereas this Duke Robert had a goodly Prince to this Son named William who was Duke of Normandy by his Father and Earl of Flanders in the right of his grand Mother that was the Conquerors Wife and Daughter of Baldwin Earl of Flanders as hath been said and was established in both these States by the help of Lewis the VI. surnamed Le Gros King of France and admitted to do homage to him for the said States his Uncle King Henry of England was so violent against him as first he drove him out of the state of Normandy and secondly he set up and maintained a Competitor or two against him in Flanders by whom finally he was slaine in the year of Christ 1128. before the Town of Alost by an Arrow after he had gotten the upper hand in the Field and so ended the race of the first Son of King William the Conquerour to wit o● Duke Robert which Robert lived after the Death of his said Son and Heir Duke William Six years in Prison in the Castle of Cardiff and pined away with sorrow and misery as both the French and English Histories do agree The second Son of the Conqueror named Richard dyed as before hath been said in his Fathers time and left no Issue at all as did neither the third Son William Rufus though he Reigned 13. years after his Father the Conqueror in which time he established the Succession of the Crown by consent of the States of England to his elder Brother Duke Roberts issue as hath been said though afterwards it was not observed This King Rufus came to the Crown principally by the help and favour of Lanfrancus Archbishop of Canterbury who greatly repented himself afterward of the error which in that point he had committed upon hopes of his good Government which proved extream evil But this King William Rufus being slayn afterward by the Arrow of a Cross-bow in Newforrest as is well known and this at such time as the foresaid Duke Robert his elder Brother to whom the Crown by Succession apperteined was absent in the War of the Holy Land where according as most Authors do Write he was chosen King of Hierusalem but refused it upon hope of the Kingdom of England But he returning home found that his fourth Brother Henry partly by fair promises and partly by force had invaded the Crown in the year 1110. and so he Reigned 35. years and had Issue divers Sons and Daughters but all were either drounded in the Seas coming out of Normandy or else dyed otherwise before their Father except only Mathildis who was first Married to Henry the Emperour fifth of that name and after his death without Issue to Geffrey Plantagenet Duke of Anjow Touraine and Maine in France by whom she had Henry which Reigned after King Stephen by the name of Henry the II. And thus much of the Sons of William the Conqueror Of his two Daughters that lived to be Married and had Issue the elder named Constance was Married to Alayn Fergant Duke of Britain who was Son to Hoel Earl of Nants and was made Duke of Britain by William the Conquerors means in manner Following Duke Robert of Normanyd Father to the Conqueror when he went on Pilgrimage unto the Holy Land in which Voyage he dyed left for Governour of Normandy under the protection of King Henry the first of France Duke Alayne the first of Britain which Allayn had Issue Conan the first who being a stirring Prince of about 24. years old when Duke William began to treat of passing over into England he shewed himself not to favour much that enterprise which Duke William fearing caused him to be Poysoned with a pair of perfumed Gloves as the French stories do report and caused to be set up in his place and made Duke one Hoel Earl of Nantes who to gratifie William sent his Son Alaine surnamed Ferga●t with 5000. Souldiers to pass over into England with him and so he did and William afterward in recompence thereof gave him his eldest Daughter Constantia in Marriage with the Earldom o● Richmond by whom he had Issue Conan the second surnamed le Gross who had Issue a Son and a Daughter The Son was called Hoel as his Grand-Father was and the Daughters name was Bertha Married to Eudo Earl of Porhet in Normandy and for that this Duke Conan liked better his Daughter and his Son in-law her Husband then he did Hoel his own Son he disavowed him on his Death Bead and made his said Daughter his Heir who had by the said Eudo a Son named Conan surnamed the younger which was the third Duke of that name and this man had one only Daughter and Heir named Lady Constance who was Married to the third Son of King Henry the second named Geffrey and elder Brother to King John that after came to Reign and by this Lord Geffrey she had Issue Arthur the second Duke of Britain whom King John his Uncle put back from the Crown of England and caused to be put to death as after shall be shewed and he dying without Issue his Mother Constance Dutchess and Heir of Britain Married again with a Prince of her own House whom after we shall name in the prosecution of this Line and by him she had Issue that hath endured until this day the last whereof hitherto is the Lady Isabella infant of Spain and that other of Savoy her Sister whom by this means we see to have descended from King William the Conqueror by his eldest Daughter Lady
Constance as also by divers other participations of the Bloud-Royal of England as afterwards will appear Now then to come to the second Daughter of King William the Conquerour or rather the third for that the first of all was a Nun as before hath been noted her name was Adela or Alice as hath been said and she was Married in France to Stephen Count Palatine of Champagne Charters and Bloys by whom she had a Son called also Stephen who by his Grand Mother was Earl also of Bullaine in Picardy and after the death of his Uncle King Henry of England was by the favour of the English Nobility and especially by the help of his own Brother the Lord Henry of Bl●is that was Bishop of Winchester and Jointly Abbot of Glastenbury made King of England and this both in respect that Mathilda Daughter of King Henry the first was a Woman and her Son Henry Duke of Anjou a very child and one degree farther off from the Conqueror and from King Rufus then Stephen was as also for that this King Henry the first as hath been signified before was judged by many to have entred wrongfully unto the Crown and thereby to have made both himself and his posterity incapable of Succession by the violence which he used against both his elder Brother Robert and his Nephew Duke William that was Son and Heir to Robert who by nature and Law were both of them hold for Soverains to John by those that favoured them and their pretentions But yet howsoever this were we see that the Duke of Britainy that lived at that day should evidently have succeeded before Stephen for that he was descended of the elder Daughter of the Conqueror and Stephen of the younger though Stephen by the commodity he had of the nearness of his Port and Haven of Bullain into England as the French stories do say for Calis was of no importance at that time and by the friendship and familiarity he had goten in England during the Reign of his two Uncles King Rufus and King Herny and especially by the he●p of his Brother the Bishop and Abbot as hath been said he got the start of all the rest and the states of England admitted him This man although he had two Sons namely E●stachius Duke of Normandy and William Earl of Norfolk yet left they no Issue And his Daughter Mary was Married to Matthew of Flanders of whom if any Issue remains it fell afterwards upon the House of Austria that succeeded in those States To King Stephen who left no Issue succeeded by composition after much War Henry Duke of Anjou Son and Heir to Mathilda before named Daughter of Henry the first which Henry named afterward the second took to his Wife Eleanor Daughter and Heir of William Duke of Aquitain and Earl of Poytiers which Eleanor had been Married before to the King of France Lewis the VII and bare him two Daughters but upon dislike conceaved by the one against the other they were Divorced under pretence of being within the fourth degree of Consanguinity and so by second Marriage Eleanor was Wife to this said Henry who afterwards was King of England by name of King Henry the II. that procured the death of Thomas Backet Archbishop of Canterbury and both before and after the greatest Enemy that ever Lewis the King of France had in the World and much the greater for his Marriage by which Henry was made far stronger for by this Woman he came to be Duke of all Aquitain that is of Gascony and Guiene and Earl of all the Country of Poytiers whereas before also by his Fathers inheritance he was Duke both of Anjou Touraine and Maine and his Mother Mathilda King Henries Daughter of England he came to be King of Enland and Duke of Normandy and his own industry he got also to be Lord of Ireland as also to bring Scotland under his homage so as he enlarged the Kingdom of England most of any other King before or after him This King Henry the II. as Stow recounteth had by Lady Eleanor five Sons and three Daughters His eldest Son was named William that dyed young his second was Henry whom he caused to be crowned in his own Life time whereby he received much trouble but in the end this Son dyed before his Father without issue His third Son was Richard sirnamed for his valour Cor de Leon who reigned after his Father by the name of Richard the I. and dyed without issue in the Year of Christ 1199. His fourth Son named Geffrey married Lady Constance Daughter and Heir of Britany as before hath been said and dying left a son by her named Arthur which was Duke of Britany after him and pretended also to be King of England but was put by it by his Uncle John that took him also Prisoner and kept him also in the Castle first of Fallaise in Normandy and then in Rouan until he caused him to be put to death or slew him with his own hands as French Stories write in the Year 1204 This Duke Arthur left behind him two Sisters as Stow writeth in his Chronicles but others write that it was but one and at least wise I find but one named by the French Stories which was Eleanor whom they say King John also caused to be murthered in England a little before her Brother the Duke was put to death in Normandy and this was the end of the Issue of Geffrey whose Wife Constance Dutchess of of Britany married again after this Murther of her Children unto one Guy Vicount of Touars and had by him two daughters whereof the eldest named Alice was Dutchess of Britany by whom the Race hath been continued unto our time The Fifth Son of King Henry the II. was named John who after the death of his Brother Richard by help of his Mother Eleanor and of Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury drawn thereunto by his said Mother got to be King and put back his Nephew Arthur whom King Richard before his departure to the War of the Holy Land had caused to be declared Heir apparent but John prevailed and made away both Nephew and Neece as before hath been said for which Fact he was detested of many in the World abroad and in France by Act of Parliament deprived of all the States he had in those parts Soon after also the Pope gave sentence of Deprivation against him and his own Barons took Arms to execute the sentence and finally they deposed both him and his young Son Henry being then but a Child of eight years old and this in the eighteenth year of his Reign and in the Year of Christ 1215. and Lewis the VIII of that name Prince at that time but afterwards King of France was chosen King of England and sworn in London and placed in the Tower though soon after by the sudden death of King John
reason is for that we read that this Lord Edmond was a goodly wise discreet Prince notwithstanding that some Authors call him Crouchback and that he was highly in the favour both of his Father King Henry as also of his Brother King Edward and imployed by them in many great Wars and other affairs of State both in France and other where which argueth that there was no such great defect in him as should move his Father and the Realm to deprive him of his Succession Thirdly we read that King Henry procured by divers ways and means the advancement of this Lord Edmond as giving him the Earldoms of Leicester and Darby besides that of Lancaster as also procuring by all means possible and with exceeding great charges to have made him King of Naples and Sicilie by Pope Innocentius which had been no policy to have done if he had been put back from his Inheritance in England for that it had been to have Armed him against his Brother the King Fourthly we see that at the death of his Father King Henry the III. this Lord Edmond was principally left in charge with the Realm his elder Brother Prince Edward being scarsly returned from the War of Asia at what time he had good occasion to challenge his own right to the Crown if he had had any seeing he wanted no power thereunto having three goodly Sons at that time alive born of his Wife Queen Blanch Daugher of Navarre and County of Champain to whom she had born only one Daughter that was married to Philip le Bel King of France But we shall never read that either he or any of his Children made any such claim but that they lived in very good agreement and high grace with King Edward the first as his Children did also with King Edward the II. until he began to be mis-led in Government and then the two Sons of this Lord Edmond I mean both Thomas and Henry that Successively were Earls of Lancaster made War upon the said Edward the II. and were the principal Actors in his deposition and in setting up of his Son Edward the III. in his place a● what time it is evident that they might have put in also for themselves if their title had been such as this report maketh it A fifth reason is for that if this had been so that Edmond Earl of Lancaster had been the elder Brother then had the controversie between the two Houses of York and Lancaster been most clear and without all doubt at all for then had the House of York had no pretence of right in the World and then were it evident that the Heirs general of Blanch Dutchess of Lancaster Wife of John of Gaunt to wit the descendents of Lady Philip her Daughter that was married into Portugal these I say and none other were apparent and true Heirs to the Crown of England at this day and all the other of the House of York usurpers as well King Henry the VII as all his posterity and off-spring for that none of them have descended of the said Blanch as is manifest And therefore lastly the matter standeth no doubt as Polidor holding in the latter end of the life of King Henry the III. where having mentioned these two Sons Edward and Edmond he addeth these words There wanted not certain men long time after this that affirmed this Edmond to be the elder Son to King Henry the III. and to have been deprived of his Inheritance for that he was deformed in body but these things were feigned to the end that King Henry the IV. that came by his Mothers side of this Edmond might seem to have come to the Kingdom by right whereas indeed he got it by force Thus saith Polidor in this place but afterward in the beginning of the life of the said King Henry the IV. he saith that some would have had King Henry to have pretended this Title among other reasons but that the most part accounting it but a meer fable it was omitted Now then it being clear that of these two Sons of King Henry the III. Prince Edward was the Elder and Lawful Heir it remaineth only that we set down their several descents unto the times of King Edward the III. and his Children in whose days the dissention and controversie between these Royal Houses of York and Lancaster began to break forth And for the Issue of Edward that was King after his Father by the name of King Edward the first it is evident that albeit by two several Wives he had a dozen Children male and female yet only his fourth Son by his first Wife called also Edward who was King after him by the name of King Edward the II left Issue that remained which Edward the II being afterward for his evil Government deposed left Issue Edward the III. who was made King by election of the people in his place and after a long and prosperous Reign left divers Sons whereof after we shall speak and among them his III. Son named John of Gaunt married Lady Blanch Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and of the forenamed Lord Edmond Crouchback by which Blanch John of Gaunt became Duke of Lancaster so as the lines of these two Brethren Edward and Edmond did meet and joyn again in the fourth descent as now shall appear by declaration of the Issue of the foresaid Lord Edmond Edmond then the second Son of King Henry the third being made County Palatine of Lancaster as also Earl of Leicester and of Darby by his Father King Henry as hath been said had issue three Sons to wit Thomas Henry and John among whom he divided his three States making Thomas his eldest Son County Palatine of ●ancaster Henry Earl of Leicester and John Earl of Darby But Thomas the eldest and John the youngest dying without Issue all three States fell again upon Henry the second Son which Henry had Issue one Son and three Daughters his Son was named Henry the second of that name Earl of Lancaster and made Duke of Lancaster by King Edward the third and he had one only Daughter and Heir named Blanch who was married unto John of Gaunt as before hath been said But Duke Henry's three Sisters named Joan Mary and Eleanor were all married to divers principal men of the Realm for that Joan was married to John Lord Maubery of whom are descended the Howards of the House of Norfolk at this day and Mary was married to Henry Lord Percy from whom cometh the House of the Earls of Northumberland and Eleanor was married to Richard Earl of Arundel thence is issued also by his Mothers side the Earl of Arundel ●hat now is so as of this ancient Line of Lancaster there want not noble Houses within the Realm at this day issued thence before the controversie fell out between York and this Family of which controversie how it rose and how it was continued I
Richard had still great jealousie of his Uncle the Duke of Lancaster and of his off-spring considering how doubtful the question was among the Wise and Learned of those days For more declaration whereof I think it not amiss to alledge the very words of the foresaid Chronicler with the examples by him recited thus then he writeth About this time saith he there did arise a great and doubtful question in the World whether Uncles or Nephews that is to say the younger Brother or else the Children of the elder should Succeed unto Realms and Kingdoms which controversie put all Christianity into great broils and troubles for first Charles the second King of Naplis begat of Mary his Wife Queen and Heir of Hungary divers Children but namely three Sons Mar●el Robert and Philip Martel dying before his Father left a Son named Charles which in his Grand-mothers right was King also of Hungary but about the Kingdom of Naples the question was when King Charles was dead who should Succeed him either Charles his Nephew King of Hungary or Robert his second Son but Robert was preferred and Reigned in Naples and enjoyed the Earldom of Provence in France also for the space of 33. years with great renown of Valor and Wisdom And this is own example that Girard recounteth which example is reported by the famous Lawyer Bartholus in his Commentaries touching the Succession of the Kingdom of Cicilia and he saith that this Succession of the Uncle before the Nephew was averred also for rightful by the Learned of that time and confirmed for just by the judicial sentence of Pope Boniface and that for the reasons which afterward shall be shewed when we shall treat of this question more in particular Another example also reporteth Girard which ensued immediately after in the same place for that the foresaid King Robert having a Son named Charles which died before him he left a daughter and Heir named Joan Neece unto King Robert which Joan was married to Andrew the younger Son of the foresaid Charles King of Hungary but King Robert being dead there stept up one Lewis Prince of Tarranto a place of the same Kingdom of Naples who was Son to Philip before mentioned younger Brother to King Robert which Lewis pretending his right to be better then that of Joan for that he was a man and one degree nearer to King Charles his Grand-father then Joan was for that he was Nephew and she Neece once removed he prevailed in like manner and thus far Girard Historiographer of France And no doubt but if we consider examples that fell out even in this very age only concerning this controversie between the Uncle and Nephew we shall find store of them for in Spain not long before this time to wit in the year of Christ 1276. was that great and famous determination made by Don Alonso the wise eleventh King of that name and of all his Realm and Nobility in their Courts or Parliament of Segovia mentioned before by the Civilian wherein they dis●inherited the Children of the Prince Don Alonso de la Cerda that died as our Prince Edward did before his Father and made Heir apparent Don Sancho Bravo younger Brother to the said Don Alonso and Uncle to his Children the two young Cerda's Which sentence standeth even unto this day and King Philip enjoyed the Crown of Spain thereby and the Dukes of Medina Celi and their race that are descendents of the said two Cerda's which were put back are Subjects by that sentence and not Soveraigns as all the World knoweth The like controversie fell out but very little after to wit in the time of King Edward the third in France though not about the Kingdom but about the Earldom of Artoys but yet it was decided by a solemn sentence of two Kings of France and of the whole Parliament of Paris in favour of the Aunt against her Nephew which albeit it cost great troubles yet was it defended and King Philip of Spain holdeth the County of Artoys by it at this day Polydor reporteth the story in this manner Robert Earl of Artoys a man famous for his Chivalry had two Children Philip a Son and Maude a daughter this Maude was married to Otho Earl of Burgundy and Philip dying before his Father left a Son named Robert the second whose Father Robert the first being dead the question was who should Su●●eed either Maude the daughter or Robert the Nephew and the matter being remitted unto Philip le Bel King of France as chief Lord at that time of that State he adjudged it to Maude as to the next in bloud but when Robert repined at this sentence the matter was referred to the Parliament of Paris which confirmed the sentence of King Philip whereupon Robert making his way with Philip de Valoys that soon after came to be King of France he assisted the said Philip earnestly to bring him to the Crown against King Edward of England that opposed himself thereunto and by this hoped that King Philip would have revoked the same sentence but he being once established in the Crown answered that a sentence of such importance and so maturely given could not be revoked Whereupon the said Robert fled to the King of Englands part against France Thus far Polydor. The very like sentence recounteth the same Author to have been given in England at the same time and in the same controversie of the Uncle against the Nephew for the Succession to the Dukedom of Britany as before I have related wherein John Breno Earl of Monford was preferred before the daughter and Heir of his elder Brother Guy though he were but of the half bloud to the last Duke and she of the whole For that John the third Duke of Britany had two Brothers first Guy of the whole bloud by Father and Mother and then John Breno his younger Brother by the Fathers side only Guy dying left a daughter and Heir named Jane married to the Earl of Bloys Nephew to the King of France who after the death of Duke John pretended in the right of his Wife as daughter and Heir to Guy the elder Brother but King Edward the third with the State of England gave sentence for John Breno Earl of Monford her Uncle as for him that was next in consanguinity to the dead Duke and with their Arms the State of England did put him in possession who slew the Earl of Bloys as before hath been declared and thereby got possession of that Realm and held it ever after and so do his Heirs at this day And not long before this again the like resolution prevailed in Scotland between the House of Balliol and Bruse who were competitors to that Crown by this occasion that now I will declare William King of Scots had Issue two Sons Alexander that Succeeded in the Crown and David Earl of Huntington Alexander had Issue another Alexander and a daughter
in the House of York these men endeavour to shew all the contrary to wit that there was nothing else but suspition hatred and emulations among themselves and extreme cruelty of one against the other and so we see that as soon almost as Edward Duke of York came to be King George Duke of Clarence his younger Brother conspired against him and did help to drive him out again both from the Realm and Crown In recompence whereof his said elder Brother afterward notwithstanding all the reconciliation and many others that passed between them of new love and union caused him upon new grudges to be taken and murthered privily at Calis as all the World knoweth And after both their deaths Richard their third Brother murthered the two Sons of his said elder Brother and kept in prison whiles he lived the Son and H●ir of his second Brother I mean the young Earl of Warwick though he were but a very Child whom King Henry the seventh afterward put to death But King Henry the eighth that succeeded them passed all the rest in cruelty toward his own kindred for he weeded out almost all that ever he could find of the Bloud Royal of York and this either for emulation or causes of meer suspicion only For first of all he beheaded Edmond de la Pole Duke of Suffolk Son of his own Aunt Lady Elizabeth that was Sister to King Edward the fourth which Edward was Grandfather to King Henry as is evident The like destruction King Henry went about to bring to Richard de la Pole Brother to the said Edmond if he had not escaped his hands by flying the Realm whom yet he never ceased to pursue until he was slain in the battel of Pavia in service of the King of France by whose death was extinguished the noble house of the de la Poles Again the said King Henry put to death Edward Duke of Buckingham high Constable of England the Son of his great Aunt Sister to the Queen Elizabeth his Grandmother and thereby overthrew also that worthy House of Buckingham and after again he put to death his Cousen-jerman Henry C●urt●●y Marquess of Excester Son of the Lady Catherine his Aunt that was Daughter of King Edward the fourth and attained joyntly with him his Wife the Lady Gertrude taking from her all her goods lands and inheritance and committed to perpetual prison their only Son and Heir Lord Edward Courtney being then but a Child of seven years old which remained so there until many years after he was set at liberty and restored to his living by Queen Mary Moreover he put to death the Lady Margaret Plantagenet Countess of Salisbury Daughter of George Duke of Clarence that was Brother of his Grandfather King Edward the fourth and with her he put to death also her eldest Son and Heir Thomas Poole Lord Montague and committed to perpetual prison where soon after also he ended his life a little Infant named Henry Poole his Son and Heir and condemned to death by act of Parliament although absent Renald Poole Brother to the said Lord Montague Cardinal in Rome whereby he overthrew also the Noble House of Salisbury and Warwick neither need I to go further in this relation though these men do note also how Edward the sixth put to death two of his own Uncles the Seymers or at least it was done by his authority and how that under her Majesty that now is the Queen of Scotland that was next in kin of any other living and the chief titler of the House of York hath been put to death Lastly they do note and I may not omit it that there is no noble house standing at this day in England in the antient state of calling that it had and in that dignity and degree that it was in when the House of York entered to the Crown if it be above the State of a Barony but only such as defended the right and interest of the Houses of Lancaster and that all other great Houses that took part with the House of York and did help to ruine the House of Lancaster are either ceased since or exti●pated and overthrown by the same House of York it self which they assisted to get the Crown and so at this present they are either united to the Crown by confiscation or transferred to other lineages that are strangers to them who possessed them before As for example the ancient Houses of England that remain at this day and were standing when the House of York began their title are the House of Arundel Oxford Northumberland Westmerland and Shrewsbury for all others that are in England at this day above the dignity of Barons have been advanced since that time and all these five houses were these that principally did stick unto the House of Lancaster as is evident by all English Chronicles For that the Earl of Arundel brought in King Henry the fourth first King of the House of Lancaster and did help to place him in the Dignity-Royal coming out of France with him The Earl of Oxford and his Son the Lord Vere were so earnest in the defence of King Henry the sixth as they were both slain by King Edward the fourth and John Earl of Oxford was one of the principal assistants of Henry the seventh to take the Crown from Richard the third The House of Northumberland also was a principal aider to Henry the fourth in getting the Crown and two Earls of that name to wit Henry the second and third were slain in the quarrel of King Henry the sixth one in the battel of St. Albans and the other of Saxton and a third Earl named Henry the fourth fled into Scotland with the said King Henry the sixth The House of Westmerland also was chief advancer of Henry the fourth to the Crown and the second Earl of that House was slain in the party of Henry the sixth in the said battel of Saxton and John Earl of Shrewsbury was likewise slain in defence of the title of Lancaster in the battel of N●rthampton And I omit many other great services and faithful endeavoure which many Princes of these five noble ancient houses did in the defence of the Lancastrian Kings which these men say that God hath rewarded wi●● continuance of their houses unto this day But on the contrary side these men do note that all the old houses that principally assisted The title of York are now extinguished and that chiefly by the Kings themselves of that house as for example the principal Peers that assisted the family of York were M●●●ray Duke of Norfolk de la Poole Duke of Suffolk the Earl of Sa●is●u●y and the Earl of Warwi●k of all which the event was this John Moubray Duke of N●rfolk the first considerate of the House of York died soon after the exaltation of Edward the fourth without Issue and so that name
elder Houses they hold this matter for very clear and all pretence of this House of Clarence utterly excluded Secondly the same opposite Houses do alledge divers Attainders against the principal Heads of the House of Clarence whereby their whole Interests were cut off as namely it is to be shewed in three descents one after another to wit in Duke George himself the first Head and Beginner of this House who was Attainted and Executed and then in the Lady Margaret Countess of Salisbury his Daughter and Heir who was likewise Attainted and Executed And thirdly in her Son and Heir Henry Poole Lord Montague put also to death from whose Daughters both the Earl of Huntington and his Brethren together with the Children of Sir Thomas Barrington do descend And albeit some may say that the said House of Clarence hath been restored in Bloud since those Attainders yet reply these men That except it can be shewed that particular mention was made of reabilitating the same to this pretence of Succession to the Crown it will not be sufficient as in like manner they affirm That the same restoring in Bloud if any such were hath not been sufficient to recover the ancient Lands and Titles of Honour which this House of Clarence had before these Attainders for that they were forfeited thereby to the Crown And so say these men was there forfeited thereby in like manner unto the next in Bloud not Attainted this Prerogative of succeeding to the Crown and cannot be restored again by any general Restauration in Bloud except special mention be made thereof even as we see that many Houses Attainted are restored daily in Bloud without restorement of their Titles and Dignities and a present Example we have in the Earl of Arundel restored in Bloud but not to the Title of Duke of Norfolk And this say the opposite Houses against this House of Clarence But now thirdly entreth in also against the Earl of Huntington the opposition of some of his own House which is of the Issue of Sir Geffrey Poole Brother to his Grand-father who say That when the Lord Henry Montague was put to death with his Mother the Countess of Salisbury and thereby both their Pretences and Titles cut off in them then fell such right as they had or might have upon the said Sir Geffrey Poole and not upon his Neece the Lady Katharaine Daughter of the Lord Henry his elder Brother and Mother of the Earl of Huntington and this for three Causes First for that he was not Attainted and so whether we respect his Grand-father George Duke of Clarence or his Great-grand-father Richard Duke of York the said Right in this respect is descended to him And secondly for that he was a degree nearer to the said Duke's Ancestors than was at that time his Neece Katharine which right of nearest Propinquity say these men is made good and lawful by all the Reasons Examples Presidents and Authorities alledged before in the fourth Chapter of this Conference in favour of Uncles before their Nephews And it shall not need that we speak any thing more of that matter in this place but only to remit your remembrance to that which herein hath been said before Fourthly they prove the same in favour of Sir Geffrey for that the Lady Katharine was a Woman and Sir Geffrey a man whose priviledge is so great in a matter of Succession as also hath been touched before that albeit they had been in equal degree and that Sir Geffrey were not a degree before her as he was yet seeing neither of them nor their Fathers were ever in possession of the thing pretended Sir Geffrey should be preferred as hath been shewed before by some Presidents and shall be seen afterwards in the Case of Portugal wherein the King of Spain that now is was preferred to the Crown for that only respect that his Competitors were Women and in equal degree of descent with him and he a Man And the very like Allegations of Propinquity I heard produced for the Lady Winifred Wife of Sir Thomas Barrington if she be yet alive to wit that she is before the Earl of Huntington and his Brethren by this reason of Propinquity in Bloud for that she is one degree nearer to the stock than they Fifthly and lastly both these and other Competitors do alledge against the Earl of Huntington as an important and sufficient bar against his pretence the quality of his Religion which is as they say that he hath been ever known to favour those who commonly in England are called Puritans and not favoured by the State but yet this stop is alledged diversly by Competitors of divers Religions For that such as are followers and favourers of the form of Religion received and defended by publick Authority of England at this day whom for distinction-sake men are wont to call by the name of moderate Protestants these I say do urge this Exclusion against the Earl of Huntington not upon any certain Law or Statute extant against the same but ab equo bono as men are wont to say and by reason of State shewing infinite inconveniencies hurts damages and dangers that must needs ensue not only to the present State of Religion in England but also to the whole Realm and Body-politick if such a man shall be admitted to govern And this Consideration of State in their opinion is a more forceable Argument for Excluding such a man then any Statute or particular Law against him could be for that this comprehendeth the very intention meaning and drift of all Laws and Law-makers of our Realm whose intentions must needs be presumed to have been at all times to have Excluded so great and manifest inconveniencies And thus they say But now those that are of the Roman Religion and contrary both to Puritan and Protestant do urge a great deal further this Argument against the Earl and do alledge many Laws Ordinances Decrees and Statutes both of the Canon and Imperial Laws as also out of the old Laws of England which in their opinion do debar all that are not of their Religion and consequently they would hereby Exclude both the one and the other Pretenders And in fine they do conclude that seeing there wanteth not also some of their own Religion called by them the Catholick in the House of Clarence they have so much the less difficulty to exclude the Earl of Huntington's person for his Religion if one of that House were to be admitted of necessity And this is so much as seemeth needful to be spoken at this time and in this place of this House of Clarence and of the Pretenders thereof It resteth then that I treat something also of the House of Britany and France which two Houses are joyned all in one for so much as may appertain to any Inheritance or Pretence to England or to any parcel or particular state thereof at home or abroad that may follow the
Succession or Right of Women which the Kingdom of France in it self doth not as is known and consequently a Woman may be Heir to the one without the other that is to say she may be Heir to some particular states of France inheritable by Women though not to the Crown it self and so do pretend to be the two Daughters of France that were Sisters to the late King Henry III. which Daughters were married the one to the King of Spain that now is who had Issue by her the Infanta of Spain yet unmarried and her younger Sister married to the Duke of Savoy and the other to wit the younger Daughter of the King of France was married to the Duke of Lorrain yet living by whom she had the Prince of Lorrain and other Children that live at this day This then being so clear as it is first that according to the common course of Succession in England and other Countries and according to the course of all Common Law the Infan●a of Spain should inherit the whole Kingdom of France and all other States thereunto belonging she being the Daughter and Heir of King Henry II. of France whose Issue-male of the direct line is wholly extinct but yet for that the French do pretend their Law Salique to exclude Women which we English have ever denied to be good until now hereby cometh it to pass that the King of Navarr pretendeth to enter and to be preferred before the said Infanta or her Sisters Children though Male by a Collateral Line But yet her favourers say I mean those of the Infanta that from the Dukedoms of Britany Aquitain and the like that came to the Crown of France by Women and are Inheritable by Women she cannot be in right debarred as neither from any Succession or Pretence to England if either by the Bloud-Royal of France Britany Aquitain or of England it self it may be proved that she hath any Interest thereunto as her favourers do affirm that she hath by these reasons following First for that she is of the ancient Bloud-Royal of England even from the Conquest by the elder Daughter of William the Conquerour married to Allain Fergant Duke of Britany as hath been shewed before in the second Chapter and other places of this Conference And of this they infer three Consequences First when the Sons of the Conquerour died without Issue or were made uncapable of the Crown as it was presumed at least-wise of King Henry I. last Son of the Conquerour that he lost his Right for the violence used to his elder Brother Robert and unto William the said Robert's Son and Heir they say these men ought the said Dutchess of Britany to have entred as eldest Sister Secondly they say That when Duke Robert that both by right of Birth and by express Agreement with William Rufus and with the Realm of England should have succeeded next after the said Rufus came to die in Prison the said Lady Constance should have succeeded him for that his Brother Henry being culpable of his Death could not in right be his Heir And thirdly they say That at least wise after the death of the said King Henry I. she and her Son I mean Lady Constance and Conan Duke of Britany should have entred before King Stephen who was born of Adela the younger Daughter of William the Conquerour Secondly they do alledge That the Infanta of Spain descendeth also lineally from Lady Eleanor eldest Daughter of King Henry II. married to King Alonso the ninth of that name King of Castile whose eldest Daughter and Heir named Blanch for that their only Son Henry died without Issue married with the Prince Lewis VIII of France who was Father by her to King St. Lewis of France and so hath continued the Line of France unto this day and joyned the same afterwards to the House of Britany as hath been declared So as the Infanta cometh to be Heir general of both those Houses that is as well of Britany as France as hath been shewed And now by this her descent from Queen Eleanor Daughter of King Henry II. her favourers do found divers Pretences and Titles not only to the States of Aquitain that came to her Father by a Woman but also to England in manner following First for Aquitain they say it came to King Henry II. by his Wife Eleanor Daughter of William Duke of Aquitain as before in the second Chapter at large hath been declared and for that the most part thereof was lost afterwards to the French in King John's time that was fourth Son to the aforesaid King Henry it was agreed between the said King John and the French-King Philip that all the States of Aquitain already lost to the French should be given in Dowry with the said Blanch to be married to Lewis VIII then Prince of France and so they were And moreover they do alledge That not long after this the same States with the residue that remained in King John's hands were all adjudged to be forfeited by the Parliament of Paris for the Death of Duke Arthur and consequently did fall also upon this Lady Blanch as next Heir capable of such Succession unto King John for that yet the said King John had no Son at all and for this cause and for that the said States are Inheritable by Women and came by Women as hath been often said these men affirm That at this day they do by Succession appertain unto the said Lady Infanta of Spain and not unto the Crown of France To the Succession of England also they make pretence by way of the said Lady Blanch married into France and that in divers manners First for that King John of England by the Murther of Duke Arthur of Britany his Nephew which divers Authors do affirm as Stow also witnesseth was done by King John's own hands he forfeited all his States though his right to them had been never so good and for that this Murther happened in the fifth year of his Reign and four years before his Son Henry was born none was so near to succeed at that time as was this Lady Blanch married into France for that she was Daughter and Heir unto King John's elder Sister Eleanor or the said Lady Eleanor her self Queen of Spain should have succeeded for that she yet lived and died not as appeareth by Stephen Garribay Chronicler of Spain until the year of Christ 1214. which was not until the fifteenth year of the Reign of King John and one year only before he died so as he having yet no Issue when this Murther was committed and losing by this forfeit all the right he had in the Kingdom of England it followeth that the same should have gone then to his said Sister and by her to this Lady Blanch her Heir and eldest Daughter married into France as hath been said which forfeit also of King John these men do confirm by his
it happeneth And as for the second point of Foreign Birth they say there hath been sufficient answer before in treating of the House of Scotland that in rigour it is no bar by intention of any English Law yet whether in reason of State and politick Government it may be a just impediment or no it shall after be handled more at large when we come to treat of the House of Portugal To the last point of Religion they answer that this impediment is not universal nor admitted in the Judgment of all men but only of those English that be of different Religion from her But to some others and those many as these men do ween her Religion will rather be a motive to favour her Title then to hinder the same so that on this ground no certainty can be builded and this is as much as I have to say at this time of these two Families of Clarence and Britany CHAP. VIII Of the House of Portugal which containeth the Claims as well of the King and Prince of Spain to the succession of England as also of the Dukes of Parma and Bragansa by the House of Lancaster IT hath been oftentimes spoken before upon occasions offered that the Princes of the House of Portugal at this day do perswade themselves that the only remainder of the House of Lancaster resteth among them as the only true Heirs of the Lady Blanch Dutchess and Heir of Lancaster and first Wife of John of Gaunt which point of these Princes descents from the said Dutchess of Lancaster though it be declared sufficiently before in the third and fourth Chapters yet will I briefly here also set down and repeat again the reasons thereof which are these that follow John of Gaunt was Duke of Lancaster by the right of his first Wife Lady Blanch and had by her only one Son as also one Daughter of whom we need here to speak for that the other hath left no Issue now living The Son was King Henry the 4th who had Issue King Henry the 5th and he again Henry the 6th in whom was extinguished all the succession of this Son Henry The daughter of John of Gaunt by Lady Blanch was called Philippa who was married to John the first King of that name of Portugal who had Issue by him King Edward and he again had Issue King Alfonsus the fifth King of Portugal and he and his off-spring had Issue again the one after the other until our times and so by this marriage of Lady Philippa to their first King John these Princes of the House of Portugal that live at this day do pretend that the Inheritance of Lancaster is only in them by this Lady Philippa for that the succession of her elder Brother King Henry the fourth is expired long ago This in effect is their pretence but now we will pass on to see what others say that do pretend also to be of the House of Lancaster by a latter marriage John of Gaunt after the death of his first Wife Lady Blanch did marry again the Lady Constance daughter of King Peter surnamed the Cruel of Castile and had by her one daughter only named Catharine whom he married afterward back to Castile again giving her to Wife to King Henry the third of that name by whom the 〈◊〉 Issue King John and he others so as lineally King Philip of Spain is descended from her which King Philip being at this day King also of Portugal and chief Titler of that House unto England he joy 〈◊〉 the Inheritance of both the two daughters of John of Gaunt in one and so we shall not need to talk of these two daughters hereafter distinctly but only as of one seeing that both their descents do end in this one man The only difficulty and dissention is then about the Issue of the third marriage which was of John of Gaunt wi●h Lady Catharine Swinford whom he first kept as a Concubine in the time of his second Wife Lady Constance as before hath been shewed in the third Chapter and begat of her four Children and after that his Wife Lady Constance was dead he took her to Wife for the love he bare to his Children a little before his death and caused the said Children to be legitimated by Authority of Parliament and for that none of these four Children of his have left Issue but only one that was John Earl of Somerset we shall speak only of him omitting all the rest This John then Earl of Somerset had Issue another John which was made Duke of Somerset by King Henry the sixth who with his three Sons were slain by the Princes of the House of York in the quarrel of Lancaster and so left only one daughter named Margaret who by her Husband Edmond Tudor Earl of Richmond was Count●ss of Richmond and had by him a Son named Henry Earl of Richmond that was after King by the name of King Henry the seventh and from him all his descendents both of the House of Scotland and Suffolk do pretend also to be of the House of Lancaster which yet can be no otherwise then now hath been declared to wit not from Blanch first Wife and Heir of the Dutchy of Lancaster but from Catharine Swinford his third Wife wherein riseth the question whether those men I mean King Henry the seventh and his descendents may p●●perly be said to be of the true House of Lancaster or no Whereunto some do answer with a distinction to wit that to the Dutchy of Lancaster whereof the first Wife Lady Blanch was Heir these of the third marriage cannot be Heirs but only the remainder of the Issue of the said Lady Blanch that resteth in the Princes of the House of Portugal But yet to the Title of the Crown of England which came by John of Gaunt himself in that he was third Son of King Edward the third and eldest of all his Children that lived when the said King Edward died by which is pretended also that he should have succeeded immediately after him before King Richard the second as before in the fourth Chapter hath been declared to this Right I say and to this Interest of the Crown which came by John of Gaunt himself and not by Lady Blanch or by any other of his Wives the descendents of King Henry the seventh do say that they may and ought to succeed for that John Earl of Somerset eldest Son of John of Gaunt by Lady Catharine Swinford though he were begotten out of matrimony yet being afterward made legitimate he was to inherit this right of John of Gaunt his Father before the Lady Philippa his Sister for that so we see that King Edward the sixth though younger and but half-brother unto the Lady Mary and Elizabeth his Sisters yet he inherited the Crown before them and in like manner is Lord Philip Prince of Spain at this day to inherit all the
States of that Crown before his two Sisters that be elder then he and so likewise say these men ought John of Somerset to have done before Philippa his eldest Sister if he had been alive at that time when King Henry the sixth was put down and died and consequently his posterity which are the descendents of King Henry the seventh ought to enjoy the same before the Princes of Portugal that are the descendents of Lady Philippa his Sister Thus say the issue of King Henry the seventh But to this the Princes of the House of Portugal do reply and say first That by this it is evident at least that the Dukedom of Lancaster whereof the Lady Blanch was the only Heir must needs appertain to them alone and this without all doubt or controversie for that they only remain of her Issue after extinguishing of the posterity of her elder Brother King Henry the fourth which was extinguished by the death of King Henry the sixth and of his only son Prince Edward and for this they make no question or controversie assuring themselves that all Law right and equity is on their side Secondly Touching the Succession and right to the Kingdom they say that John Earl of Somerset being born out of Wedlock and in Adultery for that his Father had an other Wife alive when he begot him and he continuing a Bastard so many years could not be made Legitimate afterward by Parliament to that effect of Succession to the Crown and to deprive Queen Philippa of Portugal and her Children born before the other Legitimation from their right and Succession without their consents for that John King of Portugal did Marry the said Lady Philippa with condition to enjoy all Prerogatives that at that day were due unto her and that at the time when John of Gaunt did Marry the said Lady Catherine Swinford and made her Children Legitimate by Act of Parliament which was in the year of Christ 1396. and 1397. the said Lady Philippa Queen of Portugal had now two Sons living named Don Alonso and Don Edwardo which were born in the years 1390. and 1391 that is six years before the Legitimation of John Earl of Somerset and his Brethren and thereby had jus acquisitum as the Law saith which right once acquired and gotten could not be taken away by any Posterior Act of Parliament afterward without consent of the parties Interessed for which they do alledge divers places of the Canon Law which for that they hold not in England I do not cite but one example they put to shew the inconvenience of the thing if it should be otherwise determined then they affirm which is that if King Henry the eighth that had a Bastard Son by the Lady Elizabeth Blunt whom he named Henry Fitz-roy and made him both Earl of Nottingham and Duke of Richmond and Somerset in the 18 th year of his Reign at what time the said King had a lawful Daughter alive named the Princess Mary by Queen Catherine of Spain if I say the King should have offered to make this Son Legitimate by Parliament with intent to have him succeeded after him in the Crown to the prejudice and open injury of the said lawful Daughter these Men do say that he could not have done it and if he should have done it by violence it would not have held and much less could John of Gaunt do the like being no King Nor was the Act of Parliament sufficient for this point it being a matter that depended especially say these men of the Spiritual Court and of the Canon Law which Law alloweth this Legitimation no further but only as a Dispensation and this so far forth only as it doth not prejudice the right of any other Neither helpeth it any thing in this matter the Marriage of John of Gaunt with Lady Catherine for to make better this Legitimation for that as hath been said their Children were not only naturales but Spurij that is to say begotten in plain Adultry and not in simple Fornication only for that the one party had a Wife alive and consequently the priveledge that the Law giveth to the Subsequent Marriage of the Parties for legitimating such Children as are born in simple Fornication that is to say between parties that were single and none of them married cannot take place here So as these men conclude that albeit this Legitimation of Parliament might serve them to other purposes yet not to deprive the Princes of Portugal of their Prerogative to succeed in their Mothers Right which she had when she was married to their Father And this they affirm to have been Law and Right at that time if the said Queen Philippa and Earl John had been alive together when Henry the sixth and his Son were put to death and that this Question had been then moved at the death of King Henry the sixth Whether of the two to wit either the said Queen Philippa or her younger Brother John Earl of Somerset by the Fathers side only should have succeeded in the Inheritance of King Henry the sixth In which case these men presume for certain that the said Queen Philippa legitimately born and not John made legitimate by Parliament should have succeeded for that by common course of ●aw the Children legitimated by favour albeit their legitimation were good and lawful as this of these Children is denied to be yet can they never be made equal and much less be preferred before the lawful and legitimate by Birth But now say these men the case standeth at this present somewhat otherwise and more for the advantage of Queen Philippa and her Off-spring For when King Henry the sixth and his Son were extinguished and Edward Duke of York thrust himself in to the Crown which was about the year of Christ 1471. the foresaid Princess and Prince Lady Philippa and Earl John were both dead as also their Children and only their Nephews were alive that is to say there lived in Portugal King Alfonsus the fifth of that name Son to King Edward which King Edward was Child to Queen Philippa and the death of King Henry the sixth of England happened in the 38 th year of the Reign of the said Alfonsus And in England lived at the same time Lady Margaret Countess of Richmond Mother of King Henry the seventh and Neece of the foresaid John Earl of Somerset to wit the Daughter of his Son John Duke of Somerset So as these two Competitors of the House of Lancaster that is to say King Alfonsus and Lady Margaret were in equal degree from John of Gaunt as also from King Henry the sixth saving that King Alfonsus was of the whole Bloud as hath been said and by Queen Philippa that was legitimate and the Countess of Richmond was but of the half bloud as by John Earl of Somerset that was a Bastard legitimated The Question then is Which of these two should have
Thus say these men against admitting of Strangers and it seemeth that their opinion and affection hath many followers for that generally we see most men affected and inclined this way But yet on the other side there want not other men who appear both wise dis-passionate and grave that will seem to consider this matter far otherwise and do say that all this is but a common vulgar prejudice of passionate men against strangers rising partly by corruption of Nature whereby men are inclined to think evil of others and to bear them little affection especially such as Govern and bear rule over them and so much the less by how much farther off they are from us in Kindred and Acquaintance and partly also they say that the same riseth of lack of due consideration in the most part of men for that they weigh not the true Reasons Causes or Effects of things but only the outward shew and so do run away with the Opinion and Apprehension of the Popular which for the most part hath no other ground or foundation in it but only Fancy and Imagination or Incitation of others that endeavour to procure Tumults and so they say it falleth out in this point as upon examination it shall appear And for Proof and Declaration of this their Assertion they do require first of all that this ordinary and common prejudice against Strangers or strange Governments be laid aside so long at least as the matter is in Disputation and that only the true effects of good and profitable Government may be considered without that other circumstance whether these fruits do come from Stranger or Home-born Prince which effects are Peace Rest Justice Defence of the Innocent Punishment of the wicked Wealth Security and other such benefits that good Government is wont to bring with it to the Subjects These things say these men are to be weighed indifferently and without passion by Wise men and wheresoever these effects are more abundantly to be found there the Government is best and there the subjects are in best Case whatsoever the Governours be or of what Nation or Country soever they be And this they shew by this example following If in two Countries or Commonwealths lying nigh together the subjects of the one should live in all Ease Wealth and Prosperity under a stranger as divers states did under the Romans and in the other they should be Beaten Whipped and Afflicted under a home-born Prince as we read the Sicilians were under Phalaris and Dionisius their Country-men Tyrants clear it is say these men that the stripes and Afflictions would not seem the easier for that they come from a Natural Prince but rather the heavier and the others happy case under the Stranger must needs seem to be the better and consequently his Government rather to be wished For that in very Truth the goodness and defect of every Government is to be measured by the effects thereof that redound unto the Subjects for whose good it was first ordained as oftentimes our Friend the Civil Lawyer hath touched and proved before And when the Subjects do live well and prosperously are defended and maintained in Peace Safety and Wealth when Justice is done equally to all men the wicked punished and the good advanced and rewarded when God is honoured and true Religion maintained and vertue promoted this is that which importeth the Realm and Subjects and not where or in what Country the Prince and his Officers were Born or of what Nation Language or Kindred they be For that be the Prince of what Lineage or Kindred soever yet after he is once established in this Dignity the Common subject can have no more conversation with him nor receiv any more personal benefit of him then if he were a meer stranger except only by those common and publick effects of his Government before-mentioned for that so soon as he is placed in his Dignity he becometh a Stranger unto me little availeth it to me whether he be of my Blood and Country or no and I may say as the people of Israel in the like Case to Rehoboam for that he was King Davids Nephew and of the House of Jesse thought his State assured for that he was their Lord and Natural Prince and so might press and afflict them at his pleasure But they answered him plainly Quae nobis pars in David vel quae haereditas in filio Jesse what part have we in David or what Inheritance have we in the Son of Jesse and so they left him and rather chose to be under Jeroboam a Stranger and his Servant under him This then is the first point which these men do demand to wit that we consider equally and according to Reason Wisdom and Truth and without all Partial Affect on where and by whom and by what Government we are likest to receive and enjoy the good and happy effects above-mentioned of Prosperity to the Subject For that without all doubt say they that Government is to be deemed best and that Subjection Happiest where those Benefits are most enjoyed let the Prince or Governour be of what Nation Lineage soever And on the other side that must needs be the worst Government unto me where I shall reap fewest and participate least of those effects be the Prince never so much much my Countryman or Kinsman and though he were Born in the same City Town or House yea in the same Belly with me As for Example those men that lived say they in Spain under King P●ter the Cruel or in England under King Richard the third commonly called the Tyrant what did it avail them that those Princes were of their own Country or Blood seeing they did that unto them which a Stranger though never so Barbarous would scarce have done As in like manner all those Noble Houses before-mentioned in our Country of the Dela Pools Staffords Plantagenets and others destroyed by King Henry the Eight what availed it them that the said King was not only their Country-man but also their near Kinsman What profit or Commodity was it unto Thomas of Woodsto●k Duke of Glocester that he lived under a King that was his Nephew to wit King Richard the second or to George Duke of Clarence in King Edward the fourths time that the said King was his own Brother when both of them were Pursued Disgraced and put to Death by them and lost their Lives Lands Dignities Goodly Possessions Stately Mannors and Gorgeous Houses with their Wives Children and all other Felicities of this World which perhaps under a Strange Prince they might have enjoyed many a fair day and year This is that then which these men do first require to wit that all Fancy and Fond Opinion of the Vulgar people be aparted in this matter from Truth and Substance as also say they we ought to desire and determine who are properly Strangers or Foreigners seeing some do take for Strangers and
in England to favour him and his pretence or else in respect of his own particular Family Friends and Allies both at home and abroad And for that the Party of Religion is like to weigh most and to bear the greatest sway and most potent suffrage and voice in this action and that with reason according to that the Civilian hath proved at large in the last of his Discourses therefore shall I also quoth the Lawyer first of all then treat of this point of Religion in this my last Speech It is well known said he that in the Realm of England at this day there are three different and opposite Bodies of Religion that are of most bulk and that do carry most sway and power which three Bodies are known commonly in England by the names of Protestants Puritans and Papists though the latter two do not acknowledge these Names and for the same cause would not I use them neither if it were not only for clearness and brevities sake for that as often I have protested my meaning is not to give offence to any Side or Party These three Bodies then quoth he do comprehend in effect all the Force of England and do make so general a division and separation throughout the whole Land in the hearts and minds of their Friends Favourers and followers as if I be not deceived no one thing is like so much to be respected in each Pretender for his advancement or depression as his Religion or inclination therein by them that must assist him at that day and are of different Religions themselves And more I am of opinion said he that albeit in other changes heretofore in England as in the entrance of King Edward and Queen Mary and of this Queens Majesty that now is divers men of different Religions did for other respects concurr and joyn together for these Princes advancement notwithstanding that afterwards many of them repented the same which is to be seen in that for King Edward all the Realm without exception did concurr and for Queen Mary it is known that divers Protestants did by name and among other points it is also known that Sir Nicholas Throgmorton a fervent Protestant in those days being of King Edward's Privy Chamber did not only advise her of the sickness and decay of King Edward from day to day but also was the first that sent an express Messenger to advise her of her Brother's death and what the two Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk did contrive against her and that with such celerity that King Edward dying but on Thursday night the 10 th of July the Lady Mary was most certainly advised thereof by Saturday morning next and that very early in Kenning-hall-Castle of Norfolk 80. Miles off and divers other Protestants did assist her also in that her Entry as in like manner all those of the Roman Religion without exception did assist her Majesty that now reigneth after the decease of the said Queen Mary and this was then But I am of opinion that matters will fall out far otherwise at the next Change and this partly peradventure for that the titles of Succession in the Pretenders are not so clear but rather much more doubtful now than they were then and partly or rather principally for that men in time are come to be of more resolution and determination in matters of Religion and by contention and pursuing one the other are become more opposite and enemies and more desirous of revenge and further also than this those that be of milder and better condition and have not these passions in them yet by Reason and Experience they do see the great absurdity and inconvenience that ensueth by that a man of one Religion should give aid to the advancement of a Prince of a contrary Religion to that which himself doth esteem and hold for only truth which in him that so doth cannot be denied but that it is a point of little zeal at the least if not contempt of God and of Religion or of plain atheism as others will call it And moreover I remember that the Civilian before in the end of his Speech inveighed also much against this point and shewed that besides lack of Conscience and Religion it was in like manner against all humane wisdom and policy to favour a pretender of a different Religion from himself and this for divers reasons that he laid down which reasons I confess prevailed much with me and I do allow greatly of that his opinion and assertion which averred that the first respect of all others ought to be GOD and Religion in this great Affair of making a King or Queen and that without this no Title whatsoever ought to prevail or be admitted by Christian men and that the Cities of France at this day do not amiss but justly and religiously so long as they are of that Religion that they are to stand against the King of Navarr though otherwise by descent they do confess his Title to be clear and evident for that he is of contrary Religion to them Wherefore seeing that the very same Case is like or rather certain to ensue one day in England and that it is most probable that each Party of the Realm will stand most upon this Point that is to say upon the defence and advancement of their Religion and of such a King as shall be known to favour the same that themselves be of let us examin a little if you please quoth he what force ability each of these three Bodies of Religion now mentioned is like to be of at that day in England for effectuating or promoting this purpose of a new King And first to begin with the Protestant as with him that hath the sway of Authority and present Power of the State in his favour no doubt but that his force will be also great at that day said he and especially if he can conceal for a time the decease of her Majesty untill he may be able to put his Affairs in order but this is holden to be either impossible or very hard for the different judgments and affections which are not thought to be wanting in the Court Council and Princes Chamber it self whereof we saw the effect as before I told you at the death of King Edward which was as much endeavoured to be kept as ever any was and as much it imported the Concealers and yet within not many hours after had the Lady Mary most certain notice thereof ●y those that were opposite to her in Religion as I have shewed before so ardent are mens minds in such occasions and so capable of new impressions designments and desires are all kind of subjects upon such great changes A chief Member of the Protestant Body as you know for Wealth and Force is the Clergy of England especially the Bishops and other men in Ecclesiastical Dignity which are like to be a great Back to this Party at that
Lancaster Joan eldest Daughter married to L. Mowbray Mary second Daughter married to Hen. L. Percy Hen. 2d Son Earl of Lancaster Darby and L●icester H. II. 1st D. of Lancaster made by Edward III. J. of Ga. 3d. Son of Ed. D. of Lan● by his 1st Wife Blanch Heir of Lancaster first Wife to Jo. of Gaunt 13. Hen. IV. first King of the House of Lanc. 1406. 14. Henry V. King of England 1414. 15. Hen. VI. deposed by the House of York Edw. Prince of W●les slain by the house of York Eleanor 3● Daughter married to ● E. of Arun●el The 1st Son Earl of Lancaster died without issue John the 3d. Son Earl of Darby Edmond Crockb●●k 2d Son Earl of Lancaster 8. Henry III. succeeded his Father John 1316. 9. Edward I. Son of Henry III. reigned 1272. 10. Edward II. afterward deposed 11. Edw. III f●om whom b●gan the ●●uses of Lan ● York 1326. Edw. Prince of Wales 1st Son died before his Fath. 12. Richard II. deposed by H. D. of Lanc. 1460. The House of Britany by the Second ●●ay Beatrix married to John II. Duke of Britany Arth. II. D. of Brit. whose title ends in the Inf. of Sp. John II. that married Beatrix John the first of that name D. of Britany The House of Devonshire H. D. of Exeter had no issue and left all to 's sister Ann married to Si● T. Nevil Father of R. J. E. of West John Holland D. of Exeter Son of Elizabeth Elizabeth 2d Daughter married to J. H. D. of Exet. The House of PORTUGAL Philippa eldest daughter married to John I. K. of Port. Edward I. K. of Port. Son of Queen Philippa Alfonsus V. eldest Son King of Portugal John II. King of Portugal Ferdinand ●d Son D. of Viseo in Portugal Emmanuel King of Portugal Son of D. Ferdinand Henry 3d. Son Cardinal and K. of Portugal John III. eldest Son K. of Portugal John Prince of Portugal died before his Father Sebastian K. of Portugal slain in Barbary Lewis 2d Son never married Anthony Illegitimate Son of Lewis Isabel eldest Daughter of K. Em. born next K. John The Line of Castile Const. Heir of K of Castile 2d Wife of Jo. of Gaunt Catherine married to K. Henry III. of Castile John I. King of Castile Son of Catherine Isab. married to Ferd. K. of Arag●n sirnam'd Catha● Joan marrito Philip I. Arch-Duke of Austria Chacees V. Emperour and King of Spain Philip II. King of Spain Isabel 〈◊〉 ta of Spain eldest Daughter Philip III. prince of Spain Cathar 2d Daughter married the D. of Sav●y Edward Infanta of Portugal younger Son Katharine 2 daughter married to John D. of Bragansa Theodosius Duke of Bragansa Edward Alexander Philip Brothers of The●dosius Mary eldest Daughter married Al. D. of Parma Ranutius the first Son D. of Parma Edward 2d Son Cardinal The House of Clarence Lionel 2d son D. of Clarence died before his Father Philipa married to Edm. Mortimer E. of March Roger Mort. 4th E. of March died in Ireland Ed. Mortim. E. of March slain in Irel. without Issu Mortim. younger son died without Issue The House of Buckingham Edm. of Langly D. of York 4th Son of K. Edward Edw. eldest Son D. of York had no Issue Th. of Woodst D. of Glo. 5th son of E. III. slain by his Neph Rich. Ann mar to ● L. Staf. whereby they become Duke of Bucks The House of YORK Richard ●d Son D. of York husband of Ann Ann Mort. mar the D. of York by which they claim R. Plantag●net D. of York 1 st pretend●r of that house 18. Rich. III. 2d Son of Rich. D. of York 1483. Edw. Prince of Wales died without Issue George Duke of Clarence 2d Son of Richard Edward Earl of Warwick put to death by H. VII Margaret Countess of Salisbury married of Rich. P●ol Reginald Pool died Cardinal so England Hon. I. M●●tague ●●t Son put to death by Henry VIII Winifred 2d daughter maried to S. T. Barington Catharine married to S. F. H●stings E. of Hunting H. Hastings ●arl of Hantington and his Brethren Geffry Pool Knight Geffry Pool Arthur and Geffry Pool Sons of Geffry 18. Edw. IV. first K. of the House of York 1460. 17. Edw. V. put to death hy his Unkle Richard The Line of Somerset and of K. H. 7. The Uniting of York and Lancaster Catharine Swinford 3● Wife to John of Gaunt John Earl of Somerset John Duke of Somerset Margaret married to Edm. Tuder ● of ●ichm 19. Henry VII King of England 1485. 20. Henry VIII King of England 1507. 21. Edw. VI. Son of Henry VIII 1546. 22. Mary eldest Daughter Queen of England 23. Elizab. ●d daughter of K. Henry 1558. Eliz. eldest Daughter of Ed. IV. married to H. VII Mary 2d daughter married Cha. Br. D. of Suf. Franc. eldest Daughter married Hen. Gr. D. of Suf. Cathar Gray had by the E. of Harts two sons Edward Seymour called Lord B●a●ham Hen. Seymor ad Son begoten in the Tower Eleanor 2d Daughter married H. E. of Camb. Margaret married to H. Earl of Darby Ferdinand L. Strange and his Brother Jama IV. K. of Scots first husband of Margaret Margar. eldest daughter married twico Arch. Doug. E. of Angus 2d Husband of Margaret James V. King of Scotland Margaret married to Matthew E. of Lanox Mary Queen of Scotland put to death in England Henry Lord Darly Husband of Mary Charles 2d Son married to Eliz. Candish James VI. King of Scotland The Lady Arabella Polyd. in vita ● VIII Occasions of meeting The matter of Succession discussed Mr. Promely Mr. Wentworth Two Lawyers Many pretenders to the Crown of England Sucession doubtful and why Three or four principal heads of pretendors 1. Lancaster 2 York 3. The two houses joyned Circumstances of the time present The Romman Conclave Succession includeth also some kind of election Of this more afterwards Cap. 4 5. Nearness only in bloud not sufficient M● 〈…〉 in 〈◊〉 pretenders Two principal points handled in this book Two parts of this conference Bellay apollog pro reg cap. 20. Not only Succession sufficient That no particular form of Government is of Nature To live in Company is Natural to man and the ground of all Common-Wealths Plato de repub Cicero de repub Aristotle polit Divers Praeses 1. Inclination universal Pompon Mela. lib. 3. cap. 3 4. Tacit. l. 8. 2. Speech Aristot. l. 1.1 pol. c. 1.2.3.4 3. Imbecility of man Theoph. lib. de Plaut Plutarch conde fortuna lib. de pietatem in parent Note this saying of Aristotle 4. The use of Justice and Friendship Cicero lib. de amicitia The use of charity and helping one an other August lib. de amicitia Gen. 2. v. 18. That Government and Jurisdiction of Magistrates is also of Nature 1. Necessity Job 10. v. 22. 2. Consent of Nations Cicero li. 1. de natura Deorum 3. The Civil Law Lib. 1. digest tit 2. Scripture Prov. 8. Rom. 13. Particular form of Government is free Arist. li. 2.