of him as he did his Dutchy of Normandy and do him Homage for it which would add a great Honour to that Crown Then was he be-before-hand with Pope Alexander to make Religion give Reputation to his Pretended Right he promised likewise to hold it of the Apostolick See if he prevailed in his Enterprize whereupon the Pope sent him a Banner of the Church with an Agnus of Gold and one of the hairs of Saint Peter And he likewise by great Promises got his own Brother Odo Bishop of Baieux to furnish him with Forty Ships for his Expedition After William had with great difficulty got the Battel at Hastings wherein King Herold happen'd to be kill'd with an Arrow in his Eye some of his Nobility with all their Power strove to establish Edgar Atheling the next of the Royal Issue in his Right to the Crown but the false Bishops rather bent to let in a Foreign Enemy being fool'd by him with fair Promises than to assist the Native Prince and by their Example drew in the Nobility to trust to his Personal Oath made at his Coronation before the Altar of St. Peter to defend the Holy Church that was the Papist Church and the Rectors and to Govern the Universal People according to the Laws but this Oath and his Promises were as weak to bind him as the single hair of St. Peter he had got from the Pope for as soon as he had Establish'd himself he was not such a Fool to do Homage for England to the French King nor to hold the same of the Apostolick See nor to defend the Bishops and Abbots in their fat Bishopricks and Abbies but as Cambden saith He made such clear work with them that he did not leave one English Ecclesiastick whom he thrust not out of his place and fill'd their Rooms with Erench Sr. Johns And for the English Nobility he drove some to fly to Scotland some to Norway some to Hungary and any other Places where they could be received till in the end he had totally destroyed them and filled their Places with French Contes and to shew himself no partial Dealer with those who would trust his word he spared not his own Brother Odo the Bishop of Baieux but notwithstanding the Forty Ships with which he had Supplied him on promise of better dealing he seized and Confiscated all his Treasure which he had which was very great and hoarded up with an Intention to have bought the Papacy And it is no wonder if mali Corvi malum ovum And he practised the same deceit against themselves and their false Religion had taught him towards others for let a Papist Prince swear never so many Oaths to Papists of his own Religion and break them all the same Religion fits him with Popes enough at his Elbow to Confess and Absolve him instantly or if he doubts his Trencher-Popes cannot do it he can have for Money his Unholiness himself to Absolve him from any Oath Covenant or League with any other Papist Prince whether of Peace or War and how many Examples are there of the same And more easily can he do it with his own Subjects as Dan. Hist fol. 143. King John a Papist King forswore himself to Papist Subjects being Absolved from his Oath by the Pope King John for the Glory of God and Emendation of the Kingdom in Parliament makes Articles of Agreement between him and the Barons wherein are Confirmed all the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom and Mutual Oaths taken on both sides by the King and Barons in Solemn manner for the Observation of the same Articles The King likewise sends his Letters Patents to all Sheriffs of the Kingdom to cause all Men of what degree soever within their several Shires to Swear to observe the Laws and Liberties thus granted by his Charter There we see a Papist King agrees with Papist Subjects on Oath in the highest manner and both the King and Barons and the whole Body of the People of what degree soever are solemnly Sworn before God And the Laws and Liberties are likewise Confirmed by Act of Parliament But the next News in the History we hear of is He hath some Papist evil Councellors who tell him he was now a King without a Kingdom a Lord without a Dominion and a Subject to his Subjects whereon this Papist King sends to the Pope and by Bribery he Absolves the King from his Oath Nullifies the Act of Parliament and Excommunicates the Lords Now therefore let it be shewn how these Papist Lords being laid in the Pickle of Excommunication and not having Personam standi in Judicio could have done to have bound the Conscience of their Papist King to have performed to them his Contract Covenant League and Oath or let it be no wonder if Protestants are very fearful to have a Successor of such a Religion or if they think that these Lords had not been more happy if they had had a Protestant King or of any Religion which would have bound his Conscience to have kept his Word and much more his Oath to his Subjects The Papist Lords grown Desperate of Right from their English Papist King run into the other Extreme and will Trust themselves to the Oath of a Foreign Papist King seeing their own would not keep his they send therefore over-Sea and go in great haft to Louys the French Kings Son to Sollicit him to take upon him the Crown of England who is their tres humble Serviteur and as ready to Swear to them as they to him A French Oath pretended surer than an English and to make wise to them that a French Oath was surer than an English over therefore he comes to England in Person with as great a Fleet and Army as the Power of France could make on so likely hopes of a Conquest incouraged by so great a Power of the English Barons who call'd them in and joyned with them and being Landed in Kent in May the Lords bring him to London where he takes his Solemn Oath to Restore their Laws and Liberties and recover their right for them King John who had first forsworn himself was notwithstanding in the Field with another Army against King Louys but fell into a Feaver and Died or as some say was poisoned On his Death many of the English Lords hoping to find more Truth in the Son than in the Father returned from Louys to their Native King and suddenly Crowned Henry the Third the eldest Son of King John being then but Nine years old in a great Parliament Assembled at Gloucester 28 Octob. by which Parliament his Tutelage by Reason of his Minority was Committed to the Great Marshal William Earl of Pembrook a Man Eminent both in Courage and Council And it is likewise to be noted That this Henry was begotten by King John of Isabel the Daughter and Heir of Aymer Earl of Angloulesm who was before the Marriage pre-contracted to Hugh le Brun Earl of March
Illegitimate alike how he pleaseth for Filiation and Legitimation The Power of Alienation by the Father of the Goods neither Legitimates or Illegitimates the Child are Jure naturae and Jura Sanguinis and Jura naturae sunt immutabilia and Jura Sanguinis nullo Jure Civili divini possunt Upon the whole I conclude that were there no other Example but this it utterly overthrows all manner of Objections whatsoever can be invented against the Right of Primogeniture and makes ridiculous all Popish Fictions of Illegitimation The Marriages of the Kings of Judah and Israel and all the Ebrews might be Copulatione without Ceremony Godw. Antiq. Selden As to the Laws of the other Nations besides the Hebrews first to touch on the Greeks Jus Coronae of Greece as to Legitimation Eustatheus on Homer concerning Teucer who was a Natural Son affirms That whosoever is born of a Prince is lawfully Born and so Teucer was held in as great Esteem as any other and injoyed his Inheritance for as Servius saith in Greece Consuetudinis Regiae fuit ut Legitimam Vxorem non habentes aliquam licet Captivam tamen pro Legitima haberent ut Liberi Ex ipsanati succederent The Common Law of Greece was That if a King had not a Lawful Wife any Woman he had a Captive Slave should be accounted Lawful and his Children by her should be his Successors So this was the Jus Coronae of Greece though it was otherwise as to Succession amongst the Subjects Children for they had only a Filial Portion of a Thousand Drachmae which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not Illegitimated or left without Portion Amongst the Roman Emperors there was no such thing ever heard of as Illegitimation of the Emperors Children Jus Coronae of Great Britain as to Succession differs from the Law of Succession as to Subjects till the Papal and Episcopal Laws overtopt the Imperial nor any such thing ever heard of except falsly Translated amongst the Kings of Israel or Judah or in the whole Scripture nor in the Ottoman Empire nor in any Nation except where Popes and Bishops have set their foot and as to the Jus Coronae of Great Britain as 't is well known the same is necessarily in many things as to Succession different from the Common Law of Succession to the Subject So it is as well known that neither the Romish nor Brittish Bishops have dared though they have Usurped on the Subjects to invade the Legitimation of the Crown in Great Britain and if they have as in the famous Prince Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth it hath been fruitless First Constantine the Great was the Natural Son of Constantius Sorus by Helena a Brittish Lady who is called his Concubine and whom after the Birth of his eldest Son the said Constantine he repudiated and after Married Theodora the Daughter-in-Law of Maximinianus the Emperor yet Constantius Clorus dying here in Britain his eldest Son Constantine the Great without Scruple made by any succeeded his Father in the Government of Britain and all other Western Provinces belonging to his Father's share of Empire in Scotland Gillus Nothus Gillus Nothus succeeded to his Father Evenus notwithstanding that false name of Nothus cast on him by the Romish Episcopal Laws contrary to the Law of God which Evenus was a Wife and a good Prince yet he never contracted the Mother of his eldest Son Gillus by the Ceremonies of a Priest or Temple yet was this in a time of Christianity and not of Paganism for Donald was the first Christian King of Scotland Anno Domini 199. which was long before Gillus Buch. Rer. Scot. 103. Et Skene in his Table of Kings Robert the Second of Scotland Robert the Second of Scotland Elizabeth More and Eufemia a good and peaceable Prince for those Atticbules doth Skene in his Table of Kings give him took to him according to the words of this Statute to be the Lady his Companion Elizabeth More the Beautiful Daughter of Sir Adam More his Subject without any Ceremonies of Priest or Temple and had Issue by her John Robert and Alexander after he deserts Elizabeth and Marries her to Giffard a Nobleman of Louthean And by the Ceremonies of a Priest and a Temple Marries Euphemia the Daughter of Hugh Earl of Ross and had Issue by her Walter after Earl of Jearne David after Earl of Athol and Euphemia after Married to James Douglas after Euphemia the Queen dies and much about the same time Gyford dies King Robert resumes Elizabeth and Marries her by the Ceremonies of a Priest and Temple as appears by Buch. Rer. Scot. p. 107. where he saith that after the Death of Euphemia Robertus non tam impatientia Coelibatûs quam Amore filiorum ex Elizabetha Mora prius Genitorum ipsam Vxorem duxit hanc enim eliganti forma Adami Mori illustris Equitis filiam adhuc adolescen◠vehementer amarat Ex eaque tres filios duas filias susceperat eamque Gifardo viro nobili in Lothiana curaverat collocandam verum sub idem fere tempus Eufemia Regina Gifardo Elizabethae Marito Defunctis Rex sene vetere consuetudine Morae inductus sive quod a multis traditur ut filios quos ex ea genuerat Legitimos faceret matrem eorum sibi Matrimonio junxit filios statim divitiis honoribus auxit Johannes natu Maximus Carictae Robertus Tinchi◠Alexander Buchaniae Comites sunt facti adjecta etiam Badenach nec munificatione Contentus Comitiis ad Sconam indictis obtinuit ut praeteritis Eufemiae Liberis in Rege creando gradus aetatis observaretur Whence may be observed 1. That the Sons of a Lady born before any Marriage of her with the Ceremonies of a Priest or Temple succeeded to the Crown of Scotland 2. That she was a Lady not Prohibited by the Law of God for the King to Marry 3. That she was the Daughter of a Subject 4. That the Subsequent Marriage by the Papal Law signified nothing for no stress is laid on it but the Confirmation and Declaration of the Successors sought from the Parliament 5. Though there were other Sons born of Euphemia the Queen who was Ceremoniously Married by a Priest in a Temple yet the Parliament thought just to pass by her Sons and to settle the Succession on the Sons of Elizabeth Athelstanus Nothus Legitimate per Jus Coronae Athelstan was the eldest Son of King Edward the Elder before the Conquest by a Lady his Companion to whom he was never Contracted by the Ceremonies of a Priest in a Temple but a Lady not Prohibited by the Law of God to have Married King Edward had after him five younger Sons by two Wives whom he had Ceremoniously Married by a Priest in a Temple and died after his Death notwithstanding the fourth Son of King Edward by one of his Episcopal Wives was left alive and notwithstanding the Priests and others
Cohabitation 3. No lawful Impediment why the Parties should not Marry 4. Chastity and Children 5. Length of time and no Judicial Questioning and Sentence to the contrary while alive 7. Promise of Marriage 8. Acknowledgment by the Father of the Children either by word or writing or by giving them Aliment and Education as Children As to the First Fame and Reputation which are Voces opinio Vulgi are an usual Presumption of Marriage As to the Second The Cannon Law it self Jus Pontificium praesumit ex diuturna Cohabitatione filium esse Legitimum Craig Feud 270. Cohabitation for any time is so high a Presumption of Marriage as it Legitimates the Son And amongst the Old Romans one of their chief ways of Lawful Marriage without Ceremony of Priest or Temple was Vsus that is Cohabitation and Conjugal Society for the space of a year and this was reputed so considerable a time as it made a Marriage by Prescription As to the Third which is where there is no Lawful Impediment nor the Parties are prohibited by the Law of God to Marry this makes a presumption of Marriage because it was no Sin for them by the Law of God to Marry As to the Fourth cause of Presumption which is Chastity and Children where all the Circumstances concur of Lawful Marriage as Cohabitation no Lawful Impediment Chastity of the Lady Children and acknowledgment by the Father of the Children to be his these are not only the strongest presumptions which can be made of a Lawful Marriage but are of themselves as is fully proved in the following Discourse without any Ceremony a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble As to the Fifth cause of presumption which is no Judicial Questioning and Sentence against the Marriage in the space of Thirty years in which time all Witnesses may be Dead and Writings lost or burnt the same is so high as by the Laws of the Land and of all Nations no proof ought to be admitted to the contrary nor no questioning now to be permitted of the same because it is beyond the time of Limitation of Actions and the peace and security of all Families and Kingdoms must be destroyed should Witnesses be required Thirty years after of all such Marriages as have not been Judicially question'd and sentenced in all that time As to the Sixth cause of presumption which is the Death of either Party without being Judicially question'd or sentenced while alive This by the Law of God and of the Land is so high a presumption for the Parents and so necessary justice for the Children That no Probation ought to be admitted to the contrary nor ought or can the Legitimation of the Child be question'd after the Death of either Parent yea though the Marriage of the Parents were Unlawful as if a man Marry his own Sister which is a far more Unlawful Marriage than to Marry without a Papal or Episcopal Ceremony and have Issue by her if she die before a Judicial hearing and sentence pass'd against her her Children are Inheritable and their Legitimation can never be question'd for she that is Deceased cannot be Summon'd before any Humane Tribunal And if Sentence should be there pass'd against her she is condemn'd without Hearing and therefore that the Children ought to be Legitimate and Inheritable hath been resolved by the Parliament it self as may appear Bro. Deraignement 5. Bro. Bastardy 23.44 24 H. 8. 39 E. 3.32 And it is for the same reason very clear That if Queen Katherine the Wife of H. 8. had died before Judicial Sentence pass'd against her the Legitimation of his Daughter by her who was afterwards Queen Mary could never have been question'd and should the Legitimation of the Royal Lines of England Scotland and Ireland or any other Kingdom in the World be permitted to be question'd after the Death of one or both of the Parents It is impossible but all certainty and security of the Successions to them must be utterly destroyed As to the Seventh cause of presumption which is presumption of a Promise of Marriage to shew which all the foremention'd circumstances concur and though the Ecclesiasticks of Scotland keep the people under sufficient servility of their Ceremonies of Marriage yet even thereby the Laws of the Land doth promise of Marriage without any Proclamation of Banns or other Ceremony both Endow the Mother and Legitimate the Children as appears Craig Feud 269.270 As to the last Cause of Presumption which is Filiation not only the Civil Law but the Law of God in the Scripture Legitimates every Son and makes him Heir to the Father who begot him either of a Primogenial or Filial Portion except of Inheritance intail'd to a former Wife as was that of Abraham to Sarah and whether this Probation of Filiation is made by the Son or Father as in the Civil Law is said Filium alicujus se esse probans videtur probare se esse Legitimum § Et ib. ad Marg. de Adopt who proves himself a Son to any proves himself Legitimate And by the same Law such as are proved Children are Legitimated though there were no Ceremonies of Marriage Authen Collation 6. Novella 174. Tit. 3. quibus modis Natur. cap. primo Siquis 3530. And the Scripture is Positive in the point Rom. 8.17 If Children then Heirs Et Gal. 4.7 If a Son then an Heir 5. To return again to other Laws of the Land besides those of Presumptions It is not necessary to prove a Lawful Marriage by proving Ceremonies But all Marriage is declared Lawful whether with or without Ceremonies by the Doctrine of the Church of England and the Law of the Land which is not Prohibited by the Law of God as appears by the 32 Art of the 39 Articles Roger's Articles p. 185. 187 188. as shewn more at large in the Discourse following and likewise in the Statute 32 H. 8. cap. 38. of Precontracts wherein there is this Clause And that no Reservation or Prohibition God's Law except shall Trouble or Impeach any Marriage without the Levitical Degrees Whereby it is clear that this Marriage being without the Levitical Degrees and not Prohibited by the Law of God ought not by the express words of the Act of Parliament to be troubled or impeach'd by any Humane Law whatsoever Ecclesiastical or Temporal Which said Act of Parliament except as to matter of Pre-contracts stands unrepealed to this Day and of full force And the Reasons of the said Act are expressed in the Preamble of the same to be because the Usurped Power of the Bishop of Rome hath always intangled and troubled the meer Jurisdiction and Regal Power of this Realm of England and also unquieted much the Subjects of the same by his Usurped Power in them and by making that Unlawful which by God's Word is Lawful both in Marriages and other things 6. They whom no Law of the Land makes Illegitimate are Legitimate by the Law of the Land But no Law of the Land either
truth in what the Flatterers of Kenneth boast that by this means the Govetousness and Slaughters of Kindred are avoided Neither are the Treacheries of Guardians less to be feared to the Children of Kings left in Minority than of their Kindred wherefore now the Tyrant being fallen who Ravished our Liberty let us valiantly resume the same and his Law Enacted by force and assented to by fear if it be a Law and not rather a selling us for Slaves let us abrogate and repeal the same and Restore again our Ancient Fundamental Laws which brought forth this Kingdom of nothing and from so small beginnings not only advanced to such an height as is inferiour to none of our Neighbours but when cast down hath again raised the same to its former Strength and let us imbrace the present opportunity while it offers it self which if once Elapsed we may in vain seek again The People are by this perswaded and the Twelfth day after the Funeral of Kenneth he is chosen King Anno Domini 994. And was after Slain in Battel in the Town of Vaumond in Louthian in the Second Year of his Reign And though Milcolumbus or Malcolm the second Son of Kenneth the Third who was so tormented in Conscience for Poysoning the first Son of his Brother Duffus to get an Act to Intayl the Grown to his own Posterity made no Conscience to kill Grinius another Son of the same Duffus in Battel Malcolm Son of Kenneth revives and confirms the Law making the Kingdom hereditary and having by the Success gotten the Power of the Sword into his hand in the Same manner as his Father Kenneth had by force Enacted again by force confirmed at the Same Scone by Parliament the Act of Intayl of the Crown to the Issue of Kenneth Buchanan 196. Yet doth Buchanan the same Historian p. 200 201 censure this Act of changing the Ancient Law of Election by Parliament of the Brother or any other person more fit than the Son to be Injust Imprudent and Infortunate Objections against the Reviver 1. Injust 1. Injustice Because he saith Italex enervat vires consilij publici sine quo nullus Legitimus dominatus potest consistere Such a Law enervates the Strength of Parliaments without which no Lawful Government can be for all Government is either by Conquest or Contract As to Conquest there is none demanded or acknowledged on Such a Title As to Contract there can be none without a Parliament who are the Representative of the People to contract for them 2. Imprudent â— Imprudence Because Propinquorum in eos qui Regno potiuntur insidias et Regnantium adversus eos quos et natura et lex voluit â—â—ique esse Charissimos suspitiones nesarias quas narrationis or do Exphrabit tot priorum Seciâ—â—orum clades cum illis collatae calamitatibus quae Alexandri tertij interitum sunt consecutae Leves prae ijs tolerabiles videri possunt The Treacheries of Kindred against those who enjoy the Kingdom and the wicked Suspitions of those who Reign against them who by the Bonds of Nature and Law they ought to esteem most dear as this discourse in order shall declare And the Slaughters of so many former Ages compared with the Calamities which hereby followed the death of Alexander the Third were light and tolerable Note Alexander the Third began his Reign Anno Domini 1649. he Married first Margaret Daughter to Henry the Third King of England by whom he had Alexander the Prince David and Margaret who married Hangonamus or as some call him Ericus Son to Magnus 4th King of Norway who bare him a Daughter commonly called the Maiden of Norway The Maiden of Norway had United England and Scotland if she had lived Skene And concerning this Lady of Norway saith Buchanan Lib. 8. p. 241. Edvardus Anglorum Rex gnarus suae sororis neptem Regis Norvegiae filiam unam Ex Alexandri posteris esse superstitem Eandemque Regni Scotorum Legitimam Heredem Legatos ad eam deposcendam filio suo in Scotiam misit c. Edward the First King of England knowing his Neice the Daughter of the King of Norway to be the only Remaining Issue of Alexander the Third and Lawful Heir to the Crown of Scotland he sent his Ambassadours into Scotland to ask her in Marriage for his Son They when they Argued much in the Publique Gonvention of the Publique Benefit which would ensue such Marriage they found the Minds of the Scots not Dis-inclined from that affinity for Edward was a man of great Courage and of great Power and Ambition of greater And the glory of his Valour in the Holy Warr while his Father was alive and in Subduing Wales after his death shone bright Neither could they ever Remember the Scotish and English name to have been nearer Conjoyned than under the Last Kings Neither could old Hostility be more Commodiously abolished then if there were an Union made of both Nations upon Honest and Equal Conditions The Marriage was therefore Readily Assented unto and Conditions added by Mutual assent of both That the Scots should so long use their own Laws and Magistrates till such Children should be born of the same as were able to Reign And if none should happen to be procreated or being born should dye before their Lawful age Then the Kingdom of Scotland should go to the next of the Blood-Royal Things being thus Agreed Michael or as others mention Daevid Wemes and Michael Scot two Knights of Fife of great Repute for their Prudence with their Country in those Times were sent Embassadors to Norway but they because Margaret for that was the Young Ladies Name dyed before their Arrival returned home sad and nothing done by whose immature death there arose such Controversie as vehemently shook England and almost destroyed the Name of the Scots For to go on with the History as he and other Writers Relate it not withstanding this new Act of Intayling the Crown Ten Competitors arose to the Crown of Scotland notwithstanding the Act of Reviver making the same hereditary there arose Ten Competitors for the Succession Erick King of Norway Florence Earl of Holland Robert Bruce Earl of Anandale John de Baliol Lord of Galloway John de Hastings Lord of Abergaveny John Cumyn Lord of Badenair Patrick de Dunbar Earl of March John de Vesey Nicholas de Hues William de Ross All or the most part of them alledging themselves descended from David Earl of Huntingdon Younger Brother to William King of Scots and Great Uncle to the late King Alexander But the Principal and most Potent Factions which contended were that of Balyol and Bruce On which saith Sir Richard Baker Hist 96. broke out the Mortal Dissention between the Two Nations which consumed more Christian Blood and continued longer And the Wars between the Factions of Baliol and Bruce then any Quarrel we read of ever did between any Two People in the
ubi Rex pervenerit ipsi sibi curatores Eligere posset That the King being under the Age of Fourteen Years Election should be made of a Guardian of great Estate and Wisdom who should be his Regent in the mean while and Administer his Affairs in the King's Name till he arrived at the Age of Fourteen and when he came to that Age he himself might choose his own Guardians Which Election of a Guardian must be intended to be by Parliament for it appears by the words That the Infant or Minor King must not nor is able to choose himself till he come to the Age of Fourteen And it is contrary to Reason that any other should be his own Judge to choose himself to have to himself to his own use the Custody of the Person of the King Dangerous to Commit the Guardianship of a Minor prince to the next Major in whom all his Subjects have an Interest And it would be very Dangerous to the Infant if he who is next Successor to the Crown should get the Custody of the Heir into his hands There is no Third Power can be therefore above Exception who ought to choose the Guardian of an Infant King but the Parliament And accordingly we find it to be the constant Practice of that Kingdom as appears Buchanan Lib. 19. p. 687. when it is said Sed cum homines usu rerum Edocti Perspicerint vix fieri posse ut in tanta fortunae inconstantia non aliquando in pueros aut alioqui Regno ineundo Impares haeredes jus summi Magistratus inciderit c. But when taught by Experience men saw that it could not be but in so great inconstancy of Fortune but the Right of the Supreme Magistracy might fall amongst Children or other Heirs unfit to Govern a Kingdom they Ordained That in the mean time one should be Elected Regent who Excell'd the rest in Estate and Counsel Guardians chosen by Parliament the only Security of Kings in Minority and our Ancestors following this way for the space of Six hundred Years have transmitted thereby the Kingdom safe to Posterity So Robert Bruce being dead Thomas Randolph Earl of Murray and Donald Earl of Mar Andrew Murray John Randolph Robert Stuart succeeded singly and sometimes more number are by Parliament chosen into that place So James II. being a child Alexander Leviston being of no Kin nor of the chief Rank of Nobility but only a Knight and of more repute for Prudence then Antient Descent was elected to be his Guardian Neither can there be alledged any want of persons of the Royal Stock to have been the cause of such choice for there was at that time John Kennedy chief of his Family and King James his Nephew by his Sister there were his Uncles James Kennedy Archbishop of St. Andrews Primate of the whole Kingdom in all kind of Vertue and his Brother born of the Kings Aunt Douglass Earl of Angus was not remote from the Kings Blood Archibald Earl of Douglas in Power almost equal to the King and superiour to any of the rest yet did none of these complain of any Injustice in the Parliament for making another choice and not long after four Guardians were given to James III. not taken for the Kindred but chosen by Parliament It was but of late that John Duke of Albin was sent for by the Nobility out of France to moderate the Affairs of Scotland James I. being then a child and was confirmed by a publick Act of Parliament Neither was it done because he was next of Kin for he had an Elder Brother called Alexander But James I. being absent Robert his Uncle ruled the Kingdom And with what Right Was he taken for nearness of Blood No he was chosen by the People Nor so neither How then was he created When Robert III. was so sick in body and mind that he was not able to discharge his Office he made his Brother Robert his Vice-Roy and commended his Children to him So his Brother starved to death David his Eldest Son and sought how to destroy likewise James his Younger had he not escaped by slight But he being now placed in possession of his Tyranny and his Brother dead with grief without Parliament or assent of the People he kept it and by force left it to his Son Mordach c. Buchanan proceeds p. 688. Quid enim minus justum esse poterat quam aetatem innoxiam atque infirmam ejus fidei committere qui pupilli sibi crediti mortem semper expectat optat What can be more injust then to commit the innocent and weak Age to one who always hopes for or wishes the death of the Pupil intrusted in his hands And after he saith Laodice the Queen of the Cappadoceans is related to have killed every one of her children as in order they arrived at fourteen years of age to gain thereby a little more time to reign If a Mother will destroy her Children to get the use of a little time what shall we think will their old Enemies dare yea will they not dare to do inflamed with the Brands of Covetousness to cruelty against a Child hindering their hopes of a perpetual Kingdom If this Example seems old and obscure or far-fetch'd I will add more clear and nearer home For who is so ignorant of things so lately acted as he knows not Galeacius Sfortia though at mans Estate though married and the Son in Law of a Potent King to be killed by Lodowick his Uncle Or to whom are the Calamities unknown which ensued that cruel Parricide the most beautiful Region of Italy brought almost to a Devastation the Sfortian Family The not abolishing Episcopal Laws which pretend to Illegitimate whom they please the sense of the Murder of Edward V. and his Brother so fruitful of valiant men destroyed Barbarians let into the most pleasant Country watered by Po. Against whose Rapine nothing was safe against whose Cruelty nothing was secure Who hath been born in the soil of Great Britain and hath not heard of the cruel Murder by Richard III. King of England of the Sons of his Brother Edward IV A great cause of the murder likewise of these Princes was that Papal and Episcopal Laws were not abolished which pretend to illegitimate whom they please Answ 5 Making a Kingdom hereditary to the eldest Son weakens not the Power of Parliaments And 5. as to the Reason against these Statutes which maketh the Crown hereditary to the eldest Son that the same enervate the strength of Parliaments and without a Contract made by every Prince with a Parliament no Government can be just in regard if he receives not the Kingdom by Contract he assumes it by Conquest which over a Free Nation is unjust To which is answered First that these Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which entail the Crown to the Eldest Son do no way weaken but confirm and establish the Power of Parliaments and
of six Years three Months and fourteen Days before the Interdiction could be bought off Neither payment of vast sums of Money and the laying down his Crown Scepter Mantle Sword and Ring at the feet of Pandolfus the Popes Legat and making his Kingdom tributary to Rome during all which time of Interdiction there was no Church open for Marriages or Burials but People were buried like Dogs in Ditches and where they married God knows And in the latter times of Potentates of Interdiction of the Common-Prayer Book and Marriage by it can any I say be so sensless as to censure in such a time those who were excluded from all Mass-Books Common-Prayer Books Priests and Temples if they make use of Gods Ordinance and not of the Priests and married without them 3. There is another Circumstance in this Case which makes it both Unlawful and Impossible to question the Validity of this Marriage because without Mass-Book or Common-Prayer or Ordinance of Parliament for the Lady Mother The Mother being dead the Legitimation of the Child not to be questioned who was the Royal first Companion is now dead And by Law of God and Man none ought to be Censured without hearing and answering for her self which now is impossible for who knowes if Question'd while alive What besides the necessities of War she could have alledged both as to the Fact and Law what Matrimonial Promises or Contracts Verbal or in Writing what Matrimonial Trusts what Witness what Evidence she could have produced For which reason even by our own Laws as appears 39 E. 3.32 If a man Marry his own Sister which is a very unlawful Incestuous Marriage and contrary to the Law of God and hath Issue by her and she dyes if not Judicially Questioned and Sentenced for it in her Life-time the Legitimation of her Issue shall not be questioned after her death because she was not Summon'd to answer while alive Of which see more before in the Preface So Littleton himself though he is much Devoted to the Service of the Laws and Religion of his Holy Father the Pope concerning Marriages yet he confesses Sect. 399.340 That if the Legitimation of a Child is not question'd while alive his Heir shall never be questioned after he is Dead And if a man Marry his Sister and hath Children by her if one Parent dye though Incest the Children are Legitimate 39 E. 3.32 But in this Case where there is no Incest nor any other matter in the least prohibited by the Law of God nor pretence or colour of any but the omission of a Petty Ceremony of a Common-Prayer-Book a human Law and that in a time of War too when abolished to violate the Sanctuary of the Sepulcher and the Deceased seems not only Unchristian but Barbarous How unlawful the Desertion of a Virgin is while alive hath been already shew Lib. 1. p. 88. But far more unlawful is the Desertions of her Children after her Death And how Unlawful Divorce of her is after Procreation of a Child hath been already shewn Lib. 1. p. 94. But far more Unlawful is the Divorce of the Dead Oh ye Romish Monsters ye are more Cruel than Death for death it self Divorceth not quoad praeterita Death a Divorce but no Dissolving of Marriage quoad praeterita but only quoad futura Death it self Nulls not but only Dissolves the Marriage No Dragon but that of the Seven Heads hath a Retrospect in repeal of Lawes No Wolves but those in Sheeps-clothing with their howles disturb the blessed Dead Act of Confirmation of Marriage to persons in Hostility by Ordiance of Parliament ought to have Confirmed Marriages of those who were not in Hostility 4. By the Statute 12 Car. 2.33 It is Enacted That all Marriages by pretence or colour of any Ordinance of Parliament since May 1642. which was during the Times of the War and Usurpation shall be adjudged of the same force and effect as if they had been solemnized according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England which is according to the Common Prayer-Book This ACT therefore though it give and intend Right and Justice to those who had been in Hostility and doth take away all Cavils and Scruples might after have arisen concerning the Ordinance Marriage and Legitimation and Succession of Children Yet did it not intend such as were Friends should be left in a worse condition as to their Marriages and Children than those to whom they had given the benefit of this Act or that there should only a Balm be provided for the Wounds of one party and those of the other who were more necessitated to receive them be left bleeding without any for the Royal Party could then neither Marry by the Common Prayer-Books which the Sword had abolished nor according to the Ordinance of Parliament not daring to approach their Quarters Act confirming Marriage according to Ordinance of Parliament ought to have Confirmed Marriage according to the Ordinance of God or to be publickly Banned at Church or Market-Cross Especially Persons of Eminency to Expose themselves to such a Snare as might intrap them and indanger their Lives It was not therefore the Intention of the Protestants in this Parliament That this Act of Confirmation of Marriages should have been partial and only to Confirm one Party but rather to have been as the Act of Confirmation of Judicial Proceedings made in the same Year was general to all Parties and to have Confirmed all Marriages in general made since May 1642. not contrary to the Moral Law of God to be of the same force and effect as if they had been Solemnized according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England or the Common Prayer-Book It is an old Rule that Favores sunt ampliandi Favours are to be inlarged and not restrained and it might be happy for many Families who have Suffer'd for his Majestie in time of the Wars if such a general Act of Confirmation of Marriages then made not contrary to the Moral Law of God were yet Enacted and the Favour not Restrained only to Marriages made by Ordinance of Parliament For as to those many Papists who had free Liberty to Live in the Parliament Quarters when the Royal Party had not took advantage of and first Married before Justices of Peace and after by their own Priests It is not Equal therefore that Protestants that could not have that Safety which Papists had or if they could thought it perhaps against their Conscience to Marry according to the Forms prescribed by Ordinance of Parliament should be Excluded from all Favour or Excuse to the Marriages of themselves and Successions of their Children which is by this Act given to the Marriages and Children of these who were in Hostility and of Papists themselves There was likewise another ACT made 29 Car. 2. 1677 for the Naturalizing of Children of his Majesty's English Subjects born in Forreign Countreys during the Late Troubles
Page 118. CAP. II. WHether necessary in the present juncture of Affairs for the King and Parliament to declare a Protestant Successor to the Three Kingdoms Page 121. Objections against it Answer'd Obj. 1. Declaring a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament makes a Kingdom Elective and not Hereditary ibid. Obj. 2. Acts of Precedent Parliaments cannot bind Subsequent from repeal Page 122. Obj. 3. Acts of Parliament cannot bind the Power of the Sword from cutting off those Acts by Conquest Page 123. Obj. 4. Declaring a Successor by Act of Parliament incites him to be disobedient and rebellious ibid. Obj. 5. The Ottoman Emperors never declare a Successor Page 124. Obj. 6. Queen Elizabeth refused to Declare a Successor Page 127. Reasons for declaring a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament with the Great Dangers insue the neglect Page 132. 1. Danger to the Conscience of the Prince ibid. 2. Danger by the incertainty of the Laws of Succession of the Crown Page 133. 3. Danger of the Arbitrary disposing of the Crown by Rome or Canterbury Page 134. 4. Danger of the Predominancy of Papal and Episcopal Laws of Marriage Filiation and Succession above the Moral Law of God and the Laws of the Land ibid. 5. Danger to the King's Person his Lineal Heirs and House Page 135. 6. Danger of Lineal and Collateral Heirs to destroy one another ibid. 7. Danger if the King 's Eldest Son should happen to die before his Father leaving his Heir and younger Children in Minority ibid. 8. Danger of a Successor without Assent of the People Page 137. 9. Danger of a Papist Successor Page 138. A Papist Successor more dangerous to Papists themselves than a Protestant Successor ibid. A Papist Successor or Male utterly Destructive to Protestants and a Female doubly Destructive Page 160. 10. Danger in regard of Foreign Princes Page 182. 11. Danger of exposing Succession to Counterfeit Wills and Testaments Page 190. 12. Danger of incouraging Vsurpers Page 191. 13. Danger in doubtful Titles of Interregnums Page 192. 14. Danger of Cantonizing the Kingdoms ibid. 15. Danger of Exposing the Succession of the Kingdoms to Sale Page 193. 16. Danger of Exposing the Succession of the Kingdoms to Conquest Page 197. LIB III. CHAP. I. The words of the Statute 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus as in the Original French AUxint pur ceo que divers Opinions ont estre eins ceax heurs quel Case doit estre dit Treason et en quel nemy le Roy a le request des Seigniors et Commons ad fait declarisment que ensuist cestassavoire quant home fait compasser ou imaginer la Mort nostre Seignior le Roy Madame sa compaigne ou de lour fits Eigne et Heir The words as Translated by Pulton and Coke into English WHereas divers Opinions have been before this time in what case Treason shall be said and in what not the King at the request of the Lords and Commons hath made a Declaration in the manner as hereafter followeth That is to say When a man doth Compass or Imagine the Death of our Lord the King of our Lady his Queen or of their Eldest Son and Heir The Statutes of Kenneth the Third and Malcolm Mackenneth the Second as related by Buchanan Lib. 6. Rer. Scot. p. 191 196. Adjectae sunt Aliae leges ut quemadmodum Regi maximus natu filius in regnum Succederit ita filio ante Patrem defuncto nepos avo subrogaretur Englished There were other Lawes also added That as the Eldest Son of the King should succeed to him in his Kingdom So if such Son dyed before the Father the Nephew should succeed in his stead to his Grandfather Another Law of Scotland mention'd by Skene Reg. Majest Lib. 2. cap. 33. De Nepote ex Primogenito filio Nepos ex filio Primogenito mortuo jure representationis succedit Avo suo filium postnatum Avi id est Avunculum suum excludit Englished The Eldest Son being dead before the Father the Nephew by the Eldest Son shall in right of Representation Succeed to his Grandfather and exclude any Younger Son of his Grandfather that is to say his Uncle This Law of Scotland was taken out of Glanvil Lib. 7. c. 3. which shews it is the unquestionable Law of England as well as of Scotland and likewise out of the Civil Law L. 3. C. de suis legit Haered l. Posthumorum 13. H. de Injust Testamento c. 33. ex l. 1. § 6. H. de Haered Skene saith further That of this Question between the Son of the Eldest Son and the Uncle Franciscus Vinius Treats at large Lib. 3. Decisionum Decis 501. and he allcadgeth Alciat Cons 101. Bartol in l. post fratres C. 1. de legit haered Bald. Salyc Doctores in l. si viva Mater C. de Bon. Pater The Statute made 10 H. 7. in a Parliament of Ireland called Poyning's Law The words of which are these It is Enacted That all Statutes late made within the Realm of England concerning or belonging to the Common or Publick Weal of the same from henceforth be deemed Good and Effectual in the Law and ever that be accepted used and executed within this Land of Ireland in all Points and at all times requisite according to the Tenor and Effect of the same Coke saith 4 Part 351. That Hil. 10. Jac. Regis it was resolved by the Two Chief Justices and Chief Baron that this word late in the beginning of this Act had the sense of before so that this Act extended to Magna Charta and to all Acts of Parliament made in England before this Act of 10 H. 7. And by the same Reason extends to the Statute of 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus on which this Discourse is founded from whence will be after proved these Conclusions Conclusion 1. This being granted That if the Eldest Son had happen'd to Die in the Life of his Father the Eldest Son of the Prince who died should have Succeeded Jure Representationis of his own Father as Heir Lineal to his Grandfather and excluded the Grandfather's Younger Son who is his Uncle à fortiori must it be granted that if both Grandfather and Father die the Eldest Son who is the Grandchild Surviving he ought to exclude his Uncle for he now comes in Jure proprio which is a greater Right than Jure representationis and if the less Right exclude the Uncle much more must the greater Conclusion 2. When the Right of the Crown shall actual descend from the King in Possession on the Eldest Son in Possession who is the next Lineal Heir of his Blood then is the Son Actually King both De Facto and De Jure as was his Father who died in Possession of the Kingdoms And therefore all the forementioned Acts of Parliament and Common Laws of England Scotland and Ireland and the Imperial Laws with them unanimously declare It will be
not only then High Treason to Compass the Death Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's Eldest Son but whatsoever else is High Treason against a King will be the same against him Objections chiefly by Buchanan against these Statutes and the Policy of them making Kingdoms Hereditary to the Eldest Sons Answered Object Who is best able to defend a Kingdom should have it Object 1. Salus Populi is above all Statutes and the Power of Kings and Parliaments themselves and above all Acts of Parliament Statutes therefore which Repeal the Ancient Fundamental Laws which were in Great Britain of Election by Parliament and in Ireland by the Custom of Tanistry of Succession of the Brother before the Son such Statutes ought themselves to be repealed and not to repeal those which are better and it being most necessary pro salute Populi that he who is best able to defend a Kingdom against Enemies Foreign and Native and hath learnt the same by Age and Experience should succeed which the Brother being more able and fit to do than the Son ought according to those Ancient and Necessary Customes to succeed before the Son which Custome as to Scotland is recited by Buchaman Mos majorum qui è propinquis Regum defunctorum non proximos sed maximè idoneos eligerent modo à Fergusio primo Scotorum Rege essent oriundi The Custom of Scotland was That the Parliament chose out of the Kindred of the King deceased not the next but the fittest so as they were such as were descendents from Fergusius the first King of the Scots and on this Custome Kenneth the Third who was the Brother of King Duffus was by Election of the Parliamem of Scotland preferred before Milcolumbus the Son of Duffus though a Youth of great hopes which Kenneth began his Reign Anno Dom. 970 and proved a most Valiant and Wife Prince and repell'd a Mighty Invasion of the Danes whom he overthrew in a Battel with a great Slaughter of them but the same Kenneth afterwards inflamed with Ambition Covetousness and Cruelty secretly poysoned Milcolumbus the then Prince of Scotland being the said Son of his Brother Duffus deccased and with great dissimulation counterseiting even Tears and great Grief for him Convened a Parliament at Scone whom partly by Terror and partly by Deceit he got to Abrogate the Law of Succession of Brothers before Sons which had made him King and been the Sanctuary of Publique Safety and Enacted a Law of Succession for his own private and not the Publique Interest clean contrary viz. That the Kingdom should be from that time Hereditary in this manner That his own Eldest Son should be Prince of Scotland That when any King dyed his Eldest Son should next succeed to the Crown and if the Eldest dyed living his Father the Nephew should succeed instead of his Son who dyed And other Constitutions as appears Buchanan rer Scotl. 190 191. Who saith further Kenneth making the Kingdome of Scotland Hereditary tormented in Conscience Ita Rex per scelus posteris uti putabat regno stabilito animum tamen suum confirmare non pot uit c. The King saith he having by so great a Wickedness established his Kingdom as he thought to his Posterity he could not Establish his Mind for although he courted all sorts of Men with the highest shew of Love and Courtesie and so managed the Affairs of the Kingdom that there was nothing wanting which shewed him not a good King Yet his Mind perpetually disquieted with the conscience of his wicked fact suffered him not to have any solid or sincere joy but the thoughts of his foul Crime rushing into his memory vexed him by Day and by Night most horrible Dreams disturbed his rest at length whether truly as some affirm or whether his troubled thoughts made him so fancy what oftentimes happens to Guilty persons a voice came from Heaven by which he seemed in his sleep to be warned Doest thou think the Murder of Milcolumbus an Innocent Person committed by thee most wickedly in Secret is hid from me or that I will any longer suffer it to pass without punishment For already there are Plots laid by Treason which thou shalt not escape to take away thy Life neither shalt thou as thou thinkest leave thy Kingdom Stable or Secure but full of Tumults and Tempests to thy Posterity With which fearful Dream the King being terrified Early in the Morning he flyes to the Bishops and Monks and declares to them the Confusion of his Mind and Anguish of his Conscience for his Crime but they gave him no true Remedy from the Doctrine of Christ for they had already degenerated from the Piety and Learning of the Ancient Professors But advised those many absurdities Long since invented by wicked Persons for their own gains and rashly believed of the Unlearned and Overcredulous That he should inrich with Gifts the Holy Places and Temples and should visit the Sepulchres of the Saints kiss their Reliques redeem his Sins by Masses and Alms and should have a greater Honour and Reverence for the Monks and Priests than he had formerly us'd to have Neither did he omit any of these Explations which he believed would help him But he was notwithstanding after by appointment of Fenella a Lady formerly Injured by him and an Ambuscada of Horse laid for him taken and killed as Buchanan p. 192. after the death of Kenneth and this Intayl of the Crown to his Issue by the Murder of his Brother's Son It appears Buchan rer Scotl. lib. 6. p. 192 193. That Constantinus the Son of Caten called Calvus Constantine Calvus procures the Law of Kenneth to be repealed began to dispute much against the Injustice of this Law to which they were circumvented by fear to assent and thus he begins Quid enim Stultius quam rem unam omnium maximam à prudentium censura Suffragiis ad Arbitrium fortunae revocare c. What saith he is more foolish than to take away a matter of the greatest concern from the Votes of Wise Men in Parliament and to cast it on the Wheel of Fortune and that these should bind themselves to be ruled by a Child who hath the chance to be born and who is ruled by some petty Woman and drive away most Valiant Men from assistance in the Government What if the Children of Kings should have any infirmity of Body or Mind whereby they are utterly disabled to perform necessary Acts of Empire what if Children should have possessed the Kingdom in such time when we fought with the Romans Britons Picts English and Danes not for the Kingdom but for Life or what can be said more Mad than what God threatens to the Contumacious that Children should reign over them as the highest Calamity we should enact as a Law on our selves and the greatest Threats of the Divine Prophets we should either contemn or run headlong into it of our own accord Neither is there any