Latin Idiom sometimes applies the word Princeps to subordinate supremacy as well as to those that are sole Supream But even the Authority that he cites for this silly Suggestion and others P. Virgil himself is sufficiently secluded from being Authentick by Sir Henry In 's Epistle to Queen Eliz. Savill The next Factious Insinuation that follows is that John De Gaunt this Edward the Thirds fourth Son but the Eldest surviving disputed the Succession But this as a Learned and Loyal Author observes so far from Truth that he was at the latter end of his Fathers Life made Lieutenant of the Realm and Protector of it during Richard his Minority certainly had his Competition come in Question they would have been but dangerous Trusts and against the Laws of all Nations and our own for the Civil takes sufficient Care for the removing of all suspected Tutors and our Common ordained upon Instit Lib. 1. Tit. 26. de suspectis Tutoribus Cokes 1 Insti sect 108. Daniel p. 217. the Lord 's loosing his ward for disparagement that the wardship of the Heir should never go to the nearest of kin but to the next to whom the Inheritance cannot descend Daniel says King Edward purposely to prevent the disorder and mischiefs that attend the disordering Succession setled the same in Parliament on Richard lest John of Lancaster should supplant him as Earl John had done his Nephew Arthur and this disingenuous Creature perverts the fear of Supplantation into a dispute of the Succession and Stow tells us of nothing but his being made Prince of Wales on his Brothers Death But this Uncle proved a better Keeper of the King in his Protectorate than this John or Richard the Third had but the Poor Princes Subjects kept their Faith too and not given our perjured Author another Instance for the renouncing his Allegiance and a second president for the deposing of his King And here since this Historian has already cited two or three Popish Archbishops for the Countenancing of his Puritanism and the Doctrine of Bellarmin for the Counterpart of Buchanan conspiring in a perfect Harmony for the Deposition of their Kings and their Murder I 'le tell him of another Canterbury too that blew the Trumpet to the dethroning of the next King and the sacrificing of his Sovereign upon that Altar of his Lips For the first thing that the first Usurper attempted that aspiring Prince when he landed was the causing of Arundel then the Metropolitan to preach down King Richard the Prelate had ready a Bull procured from Rome promising Remission of Sins to all those that should aid the said Henry and after their death to be placed in Paradice which preaching as our Author says moved many to cleave to the Duke Stow p. 320. but this Popish Puritan knows our Bishops and Divines since the Reformation have taught him better Doctrine and he licks up the very Poyson of his deadly Foes only to spit the venom in the Face of the Government But with what face can he tell us of a Parliament here drawing up a Form of Resignation which was just as much a Parliament as their late Major part of Members that were to be obey'd in their Association An Invader Usurper and a banisht Subject takes upon him in the name of his Sovereing to Summon it and so did our late Rebels fight and fire at his Majesty but still with his own good Leave and Authority this Convok't that Parliament as Cromwel secluded his with an Army at his heels only those had secured their King in the Tower these in the Isie of Wight and shall these their Journals of Rebellion make up a Book of Presidents Is such a fellow fit to breath under a mild Government that calls for Blood where there is so much Mercy that Recommends to your reading an Impeachment of his King and refers you to the Charge and Articles that were drawn up for his Deposition as a worthy Subject and well deserving to be read Brief History page 7. Why did he not tells us too as well deserving to be imitated Jan. 20 48. The Sollicitor Cook presented the Charge against CHARLES STEWART Engrost ordered that it be returned to him to be exhibited Preposterous Lump of Law and It is a Maxim in Law Rexest Principium Caput Finis Parliamenti Logick revers'd that prints himself the Contradiction to common Equity and Reason can such a Body Politick justly convene it self only to Rebel against its head and to take away that Breath from whence it needs must have its being and can those Laws be made to Vid. Bracton Lib. 1. C. 2. Leges Anglicanae Regum Authoritate jubent conspire his Death from whom themselves acknowledge they receive their Life But as to the matter of Fact it self you shall see what Sence some of the Times had of it The King of France 22. E. 3. 6. Resolved the King makes Laws by the Assent of Lords and Commons was so sensible of this Injurious Proceeding that it ran him into a fit of Frenzy Richard being related to him by the Marriage of his Daughter he acquaints his Lords with his Resolution of Revenge and they shew'd themselves as ready to take it too but were prevented here in England by their taking away his Life which made them desist not able to serve him after his Death This is but an Evidence how the Villany was resented abroad and you may find they were as much upbraided with it at home and that to their very face when a Parliament was sitting and their Usurper on the Throne by the Loyal Prelate of Carlisle whose Memory may it live as long as Loyalty can flourish or our Annals last so solid and unanswerable were the Suggestions so significant the Sense of this pious Soul that it silenc'd all the Senate that Vide Baker and Trussel agree in the same of the Bishops Speech was sitting and nothing but the prospect of some private or publick Favor and Preferment hindred their Conviction their King was cool enough in prosecuting of his bold Truths being scarce warm in his own Government yet at last upon Debate and Consultation they confin'd the bold Bishop for a while for the Liberty that he took and could only condemn his bold Indiscretion for shewing them so much the badness of their Cause Hollinshed tells us this poor Prince was most unthankfully us'd of his Subjects In no Kings days were the Commons in greater Wealth or the Nobility more 3d. Vol. Chron. f. 5â—8 cherisht how near some of our pamper'd Jesuruns that are fatten'd to rebel confirm the danger of too much Luxury and ease the present fears from their experienced Attempts can best attest But the fatality that befel that unhappy Prince affords us the best politicks for the prevention of the like Fate And now for his Henry the Fourth he is forc't to falsifie for his depending on the Parliaments choice when in
among the Romans and if the People had any Right to this Judicial power those Miscreants more modestly place it among the most eminent whereas our brisker Assertor of this Anarchy makes it out That therefore our more eminent Memberships have this Original Power only because Communicated them from the meanest People so that now we have a Parliament that has an Original Natural Liberty of the People tho their very Constitution it self commenc'd from the very Grant Grace and Favor of the King I could never meet with any Record yet that rehearsed these Privileges of Parliament But we have many extant and Presidents even of the House of Commons themselves that their Privileges and much of their Power proceeds from the Liberalities of their Prince more than this Natural Liberty of the People not to mention that their very being was first the result of such an Act of his Grace for from whom pray had they that freedom of Speech they upon every Session desire by their Speaker but from that King before whom they are to Speak who is it that fills their Chair those that present him or the King that accepts or disapproves whom they have presented who is it that gives them access to his Person the Commons that desire it or he from whom 't is desir'd 2. Lastly who impowers them to consent to a Bill those that supplicate his Majesty would be pleased to enact or his Majesty that says Be it enacted could this Natural Original power of the People be communicated to their Representatives the dispute about the Commons Right would be carried for ever on their side and we need not date their Original from Henry the Third or the Barons Wars or from the Saxon Heptarchy it self to be sure they then had their Representatives assoon as they had this Power and this Power it seems was assoon as they were a People And by this Original Power which they delegate for ought I see they may by the same rule as well retain it suffer no Representatives at all but assemble themselves and exercise the Soveraignty If the People delegate an Original power and a Natural Liberty to this Parliament it cannot certainly be comprehended how these Parliaments as now constituted could commence by the Grants and Concessions of the Prince and yet all will allow tho they disagree in the time that they did begin at first to be so Assembled by the Bounteous Permission of the King and that all the Privileges they claim were the result of an entire Favour of the Soveraign and not the Original freedom of the Subject if they 'll call that an Original Power to send Representatives it must be somewhat like that Author 's Secondary Original we so lately consider'd and that tho they prescribe to it for this seven hundred year as well as they cannot for above four or five 100 still it will recurr to this That this first power was the Grant of the Crown And these prescriptions as themselves allow being whenever they begun the result of the Soveraigns Bounteous Permission I cannot see why those Immunities may not be resign'd to the same Crown from which they were once receiv'd or those Franchises for prescription it self in this case is properly no more may not be Absolutely forfeited by those that at best can but be said to hold them on Condition I know the Common Law Favours a Prescription so far as in Inheritances to let it have the force of a Right when their cannot be made out any other Title but this I look upon to be of another Nature when the Original of what they prescribe too by their own Concessions was the Grant of their King and even this Common Law commonly in all its Customary Rules excepts the Prerogative of the King nay this very Prerogative of his by that very Law is allowed to be the Principal * Case of Usurpation Coke Litt. 344. B. The Prerogative of the King is given by the Common Law and is part of the Laws of the Realm 3. Instit p. 84. Stamf. pl. Cr. 62. a Prerog 5. part of it I urge this because it is both apposite here and a Case upon our late Elections much controverted and to say as some do That such a Prescription cannot be forfeited proceeds from a confounding of the word in this Case with that Prescription by which some of them have a Title to their Estate for their Common Objection about this their Elective power is That the King may as well deprive them of their Birth-right when this their Birth-right might commence by an Original Right but the Power of this Electing must Necessarily and Originally first come from the Crown But yet they know too that this their very Birth-right is in many Cases forfeitable by their own Act to the Crown and for their Burgage it self should we abstract Burgh an Antient Town holden of the King Coke Litt. 164. from that Elective power that attends it nothing else but an Antient tenure of their very King And if in the Saxons time as the popular advocates would persuade us the Commons were call'd to sit in Parliament 't is certain they could not come as Burgesses too for all that Borâ—oe in their Toungue signified if we can â—elieve my Lord ‖ Ibid. Our Neighbours Kingdom of Scotland had Parliaments not above 700. years agon and even their Republicans will allow they had Kings long before that call'd only the Preceres as a worthy Author of theirs observes Sir G. M. Jus. Reg. That their old Laws run just like ours here the Kings only Acts and that their Burgesses did not begin till about 300. year agon Which makes it more likely that our own was not summon'd much long before for tho they were different Kingdoms yet Neighbouring Nations and might nearly follow our Innovations vvhen in a thing that must be lik'd by all Subjects Coke and from which the word Burgh was since deriv'd its signification was only this Those ten Companies or Families that were one anothers pledge and so should they prove it to us as clear as the Sun as well as they have left it much in the dark still those their Commons could never be of those that had any Right to come but only such as the Grace of the King should call and even in Edward the first 's time those very Barons some say that were only most wise were summon'd by the King and their Sons if they were not thought so prudent as their Fathers were not call'd to Parliament after their Fathers death Therefore since Prescription since Parliament it self depended all heretofore upon the pleasure of the Prince I cannot see how the Subject shall ever be able to make it his Original Right and tho some are so bold as to say such a prescription cannot be forfeited or resign'd by the Subject resum'd or restor'd to the Crown for they must maintain those propositions or else they have no reason for their
wrong but here those several alterations were all caus'd to be made for the securing of a Lineal â—egitimate and lawful Successor to the Throne for as a Reverend Author says the King Lamented that he should leave Bishp Godwins Histo H. 8. p. 37. the Kingdom to a Woman whose Birth was â—estionable and he willing to settle the Kingdom on his LAWFUL Issue and for this reason he got the 25th to pass against his Daughter Mary And the very Preamble of the Act tells us that it was for the Surety of Title and Succession and Lawful Inheritance Three years are scarce past till the 28 of his Reign repeals almost all that the 25 had Enacted their Protestant Queen Elizabeth made as well as the Popish Mary plain Bastard and tho our prejudic'd Author may make the same Vid. Pulton Stat. matter right and wrong as he stands affected he must think this his powerfuâ— Parliament dealt a little hard with thâ— latter whose Mother was never divorc't but from her Life and she paâ— off for a spurious Off-Spring only upoâ— the pretended suggestions of Anne Boleyn unknown impediments confess 't sine to Canterbury But whatever they were the Canons of the Church tho born bâ—fore Marriage and since after the verâ— Laws of the Land did make her Legitâ—mate But however this greater piece ofâ— justice to this good Protestant Queeâ— which they 'l say now proceeds from the Kings putting the Parlament In 's 31 as incontinency was made impediment in the first Anns Case they declared the suant of concupiscence an Impediment in the 2ds and only upon his sending some of his Lords to the lower house the Lady Cleves was unlawful too Vid Stow p. 581. Baker 288. Stat. 35. H. 8. upon too much Power wâ— palliated all along with the pretence of providing a Legitimâ—â—â— Lawful Successor and so the cleâ—â— Reverse and Contradiction of thâ— proceedings of our late Patrioâ— to whose Privileges those sort presidents were apply'd for those Parliamentary In the 33 the Parliament petition'd to him whom they knew it would please for the Attainder of Kat. Howard his 5th Queen Powers seculded but Bastards to make room for Heirs Lawful and Legitimate with us an Issue truly Legitimate should have been EXCLUDED for the setting up of a SPURIOUS ONE But then at last comes the 35th of his Reign and that like a Gunpowder Plot in the Cellars blows up all the former foundations of the whole House both the two former Stat. for Disabling Illegitimating are null voy'd repeal'd the LADY MARY Sister Elizabeth in those seven years suffered my Lord Bacons transmutation of Bodys and were turned all into new matter and what was Spurious Illegitimate and in Capable with the single Charm of be it enacted was become truly Lawful Lineal Heir of the Crown and Capacitated to succeed in an HEREDITARY DISCENT and so far from Invading the Prerogative so full of giving were the bountiful Parliaments of those times that they Impower their too Powerful Prince to dispose of his Crown by Letters Pattents or an Arbitrary Testamentary disposition an Oblation I think his present Majesty might esteem too great to be accepted who knows his Successor to be the Crown 's Heir scarce his own much less the PARLIAMENTS Edward the Sixth upon his Fathers death succeeded an Heir Lineal Legal and Testamentary yet the first thing this Author observes upon him is the greatest falsehood viz. That he took upon him a power what surely no King ever had to dispose of his Crown by Will When in the very Preceeding president his own Father by his Will manifested he had the Power and left it him by his last But his he 'll say was a Power given him by Parliament But that is not so plain neither both from the Preamble and the purport of both the dissonant Acts of 28 and 35. for the designs of both were only for the settling the Succession and then upon supposition of the failure of Issue from those upon whom it was setled they fairly leave it to his last Will or his Letters Pattents but supposing this Liberty had not been allow'd can he imagin that a King that had got them to alter the succession at his pleasure in his Life time would not upon the failure of the Limited Heirs have dispos'd of it by Will at his death but that none but this Edward of our Kings took this power upon him is utterly false from these several instances First the very first King of his name in the Saxon succession left it so to his Son to succeed And Athelstan Malmsbury Lib. 2. c. 6. fol. 27. Jussu patris in Testamento Athelstonus in Regen acclamatâ—â— est whom above this Gentleman recommended to the City of London for a Mon. and Illegitimate against the sense and silence of all Historians was declar'd King by the Command and last Will of his Father Edward the elder in the Reign of the Danes Canutus did the same bequeath'd Norway to Swain his eldest and England to his youngest Son and for the Norman Succession the very first King and who had the most right to do so from the Sword left to Rufus the right but of an Heir Testamentary tho followed by his Son Henry the first And Richard that had less reason so to do for his Daughter Maud by the Law of the Land would have been his Heir without the Legacy and so would to the latter his Nephew Arthur and tho both were by Rebellion rejected yet still sure their right remain'd But for this Edward the 6th disposing it by Will it was not only against the Customary Discent of the Realm in a right blood but of an Express Entail in several Acts of Parliaments I am so far of this Authors opinion that I believe it was no way warrantable but never the sooner for his Parliaments settlement had it not been at last upon the right Heirs for tho those Princes of ours heretofore took upon them to leave Successors by Will they still nominated those that by Blood were to succeed without such a Nomination so that the bequest was more matter of Form then Adoption only to let the Subjects know whom they look't upon to have the right of Succession rather than to superadd any thing of more right and that 's the reason or ought to be that we properly call the next in Blood the Kings Successor but the Crowns Heir 'T is a little prodigious Paradox to me that it must be such a receiv'd Maxim that a Parliament can do no wrong and that in plain Terms they tell us it can do any thing mollifying it only with an Exception that they can't make a Man a Woman yet that they bid pretty fair for too in these Presidents of Harry the 8th when they made Bastard Females of those that were Legitimate and then Legitimis'd again the same Bastards and 't is as mighty a Miracle to men unprejudic'd that our Parliament Patriots
should contend for the disordering the Succession of the Crown who still labour for the Lineal Discent of their own Common Inheritance and I will appeal to the breast of the most violent contender for this Power whether an Act made for the disabling one of their own Sons or design'd Successors would not by themselves be look't on as unjust if not utterly defeasible and then 't is sure prodigiously strange where so many Learned Heads tell us of a sort of entail from a power Divine where the common Custom of the Kingdom has been a constant course of Lineal Discent unless as has been shown a perfect Rebellion interven'd And where themselves acknowledg this sort of Succession has been sometimes by Statute entail'd yet still they should think that but Justice to their Kings Successor which they would resent as an Injury to their own But they may vouch for it the common sort of Recoveries from a right Heir with a too Cunning sort of vouching and perhaps too much practis'd but I am sure it no way agrees with the Laws of Forraign Nations and has been a little condemn'd by some learned Heads in our own and some that have brought it into dispute seem to have rais'd a Devil not so soon to be put down in their Dialogues Vid. Dr and Student p. 49 to 58. but however this Objection is nothing analagous nothing of a Parallel Case for here is a Complication of both Parties Concern'd and concluded upon by both their Consents and where shall we find the perfect Proprietor of Crowns and Scepters and when God has told us to that by him they Reign that bear them and they 'l hardly vouch the Almighty for a piece of Injustice But allowing it for once a meer Human Constitution and in their bandied Authority of Saint Peter an Ordinance of Man and the Kings Consent with his Parliaments to determine the Point yet still the great disparity would call for a little longer consideration than a Common Recovery and not presently to cut off the right of an Heir to three Kingdoms only because commonly done at Westminster of one to so many Cottages and besides when that has been practis'd so long and born the test of Time and this their attempt would have been the first President And at last what has silenc'd their Advocates for ever the non-concurrence of the King and his Lords whose consent was by themselves suppos'd to be necessary because requir'd and will like those recognitions of some of our former Parliaments for an Hereditary Succession perpetuate that right in spight of the Laws of others that were made for altering it and should the Commons ever get such a Bill to pass 't is enough to say 't was once rejected by the Peers unless they can prove that the Question was put again Whether the lower House should take advice of the Lords in the Legislative power and that 't was Resolved that the House of 6. Feb. 48. carried in the Neg. p. 15. voices Peers was useless dangerous and ought to be abolish't and Order'd that an Act be brought in for that purpose Queen Mary succeeds her Brother In the very first of her Reign there was an Act made declaring her Succession and Inheritance to be by right of Blood Edward with all the Right of Blood with all the Law of God and Man too on her side for whatever the Parliament pretended they could never Illegitimise that which was begotten in Matrimony celebrated according to the Laws of the Church and the Realm for whatsoever defect there was found subsequent to the Consummation of the Marriage in common reason and equity ought not to have extended to the making that Issue spurious which had all the requisites to the making it truly Legitimate tho perhaps the subsequent discoveries might be sufficient to cause a Divorce and in the too Common Case of Adultery 't would be severe far from Equity to make Bastards of all that were born before the Conviction of the Fact but it may be reply'd to this That these were such Impediments as related to the Contract ab Jnitio and where that 's Invalid there the Children begotten after can't be suppos'd Lawful Heirs when the Contract it self is against Law but tho still I shall look upon that as a rigorous resolution when I think Innocents and Infants ought to be more favour'd especially when there is a Maxim in the Law even in the like Cases that the fact Quod fieri non debet factum valet may be valid tho the doing of it can't be justifi'd and besides there being a Rule that obtains amongst Civilians That Leg. qui in provincia Sect. divs H. de Rit Nup. 1. 4. Marriage contracted without any preconceiv'd Impediment tho it after come to be dissolv'd as unlawful yet Children begotten in such a state are reputed truly Legitimate and tho Appeals to Rome were then Punishable with a Premunire yet the Civil Law then obtain'd much more than it does now that Stat. being very young as well as the Reformation and by the Laws of the Church long before it they were such Latitudinarians in this point that the subsequent Marriage would Legitimate those that were born before the Contract but that I confess was rejected here in 20 Harry the 3d's time 20. H. 3d. because contrary to the common Laws of the Realm which the Parliament resolutely declar'd they would not change But what ever power they had of Nullifying this and making Mary spurious 't is certain another and latter Act 35. H. 8. made her as much Legitimate by making her Hereditary insomuch that what ever Edward her Brother was prevail'd upon a young Prince and a dying one whose forward Understanding might be well disorder'd with an approaching Death and an untimely end and which might be easily prevail'd upon in such Circumstances by the Cruel sollicitations of the designing Northumberland Stow. 609. Vid. Bishop of Hereford's last year of E. 6. whose Son had but just Married Suffolk's Daughter the designed Queen yet even then Cranmer the truly Loyal Bishop and as true a Protestant of which his adbering to the right of the Crown was the best testimony tho now 't is made but a preposterous Emphatical expression of that Religion to invade it that worthy Prelate tho he suffer'd in the Succeeding flames of a real Persecution when demanded by these State Projectors his sense of the setting up of this Testamentary Queen declar'd it was no way agreeable to Equity to disinherit the two Sisters and that the Succession could not be Lawfully alter'd upon any pretence tho Religion then too was the very thing pretended the Bishop of Hereford that was as good a Protestant observes upon the Suffolk men siding with Queen Mary tho they knew she was for setting up of Popery says that our English are in their respects to their Prince so Loyally Constant that no regard no pretext of
Heaven because he had his Clergy allowed here upon Earth can he Prescribe with the Laws of the Land to impunity from the Decalogue and tell the Almighty some Killing is mâ— Murder Here his God his Saviour is invoked in a Solemn and Sacred Oath upon the Gospel and one that should be a Divine Expositor of both consults upon it the Readings of Mr. Hunt and a Resolution of the Common Law here he Swears to the Vid. Form of Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy plain meaning of the Words without any Mental Reservation whatsoever and yet thâ—â— Mungrel in Divinity means now to taken in his mind according to a ereiv'd Maxim in the Law And this Libeller of the Primitive Christians looks like an Apostate that was as Primitive who kept pointing to the papers he put upon his Breast while he was Swearing to others that he held in his hand But yet I dare Appeal even to his own Breast who without doubt had often taken these Oaths being graduated in an University and Ordain'd a Divine tho unworthy of both whether the Words Heirs and Successors were not understood by himself of such as were to Succeed by an Hereditary Right by Birth and Blood to the Crown and whether that he did then Reserve to himself only such as did Actually succeed by Consent of Parliament and whether he did not think that by them he was not only obliged to obey those Heirs when they came to the Crown but also to do all that in him lay to promote in the due time their coming to wear it certainly to confine their Sense only to those that shall de facto succeed is but Swearing an Implyed Allegiance to any Rebel or Vsurper and the word Lawful that still accompanys Successors will not mend the Matter with such men for all is presently Legal and just with them that has but the shadow of a Parliamentary power for it's pretence And I am well assured That those that would have thought such an Exclusion just and equal with their King 's passing it would have thought it as Legal could they have sate till they had made it pass without The good old King at first disputed his Militia as hard with them and who could have believed any sort of men could have thought it the Parliament's without his Consent But assoon as the Rebel House had made their Ordinance for the Seizing it which of those Miscreants did not think it as much Law And the more than probable project at Oxford shrewdly Insinuates they would have warranted an EXCLVSION without their Kings leave Legal had they been allo'w but a further progress in their ‖ Vid. King's Speech to the Parliament there Vnwarrantable Proceedings But as much as Mr. Johnson Triumph 's with this his Maxim of the Law * Julian pag. 19 20. as if he were the first Divine that had discover'd this deceitful Evasion this Jesuitical interpretation of his Protestant Oath Tho he and his Hunt and all his Lawyers in the Hall should tell us Ten Thousand times of this Seditious sort of Construction this Senseless Sophistry upon the plain word Heir as well as he Page 19. says they do an Hundred still all their Noise and Nonsense about Presumptive Apparent Actual possible will be nothing more than what the late Rebels that had Actually Murder'd the best of Monarchs made their defence to Justifie Treason and Sacrilege it self so that all this Divine's Sophistry savours not only of Nonsense and Sedition but of an old odious rank Rebellion and for to satisfie him that the Suggestion is serious and founded upon Matter of Fact if he can find among all his Seditious Papers he has habituated himself to peruse and what if he pleases I can lond him for his perusal such an old obsolete piece as was publisht after they had Butcher'd the best of Kings * A Treatise perswading Obedience in Lawful things to Authority tho unlawful Printed London about 1649 Ibid. wherein they endeavour'd to persuade the people to be subject to their Tyrannous Usurpation there will he find the very two Pages that he spends to promote the Quaint Conceptions of his Noddle about nothing or what is worse Faction and Folly for tho he tells us these tales Fifteen Hundred times over they told us so much for Forty years agon and that to satisfie Tender and Malignant Consciences that there lay no Obligation from their Oath of Allegiance upon them to adhere to the right Heirs of Charles Stewart because that those Branches Page 10. of the Oath which the Providence of Ibid. God had made Impossible to be observed must be lay'd aside and then they go on to shew that Heirs and Successors must Page 12. be taken Copulatively and so the word Heirs must be meant only of those that do Actually succeed But the Providence of God * Vid. Also a Religious Demurrer about submission to the present Power Printed London 1649. as they call'd it having kept the Heir of Charles Stewart from succeeding his Father had made say they that part of the Oath Impossible to be Observ'd and so the power must now be Obey'd Actively in what hands soever it be Seditious Soul 'T is too much to be Senseless too Consider but upon this Occasion a Case your self have * Julian pag. 12. Cited 't is that of the Lady Jane Did not the Laws adjudge it Treason in that poor imposed Princess for endeavouring to hinder the True Heir from being the Actual Successor and to say Queen Anno Mariae 1. Mary was then already Succeeded will not salve the Matter for it was resolv'd Treason too in her Father Northumberland his Contrivance of the Will for the Queens Exclusion which confirm'd as it was by the Privy-Council was as much an Act of State as the Bill by which our present Heir was to be Excluded and then what they did was but in pursuance of that Will after Edward's Death and as the Duke told Arundel that Arrested him that he had Acted only by the Council and Commission of King Edward Yet all was adjudg'd a defence Insufficient and I cannot see why the same Law would not have made those Traytors had the Bill past that rebell'd upon pretence of such an Act of Parliament as well as it did others that resisted upon the pretext of a Will Confirm'd in Council and which * themselves would Julian p. 12. have a sort of Exclusion and is almost as much an Act of state 'T is strange that men that would be thought so mighty Rational should not only argue against the known Rules in all Logick but against the very Inferences of Common Reason a man of Ordinary Sense without the help of his Hereboord will allow that any Vniversal and General Assertion in includes all Particulars And shall vve vvhen vve svvear Faith and Obedience to the Kings Heirs and Successors Generally Reserve an Exception of such whom the