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
also in that of Polidor it may be noted that King Henry the Fifth was not called King until after his Coronation but only Prince though his Father King Henry the Fourth had been dead now almost a month before and secondly that the Parliament consulted de Rege creando more majorum as Polidor his words are that is of making a new King according to the antient custom of their Ancestors which argueth that he was not yet King though his Father were dead not that the manner of our old English Ancestors was to account him so before his Admission Thirdly That this demonstration of good-will of the Nobility to acknowledge him for King before his Coronation and Oath solemnized well and justly to Govern the Realm was very extraordinary and of meer good-will And Last of all That this was never done to any Prince before King Henry the Fifth All which Points do demonstrate that it is the Coronation and Admission that maketh a Perfect and True King whatsoever the Title by Succession be otherwise and that except the Admission of the Common-wealth be joyned to Succession it is not sufficient to make a lawful King and of the two the second is of far more importance to wit the Consent and Admission of the Realm than nearness of Bloud by Succession alone This I might prove by many Examples in England it self where Admission hath prevailed against Right of Succession as in William Rufus that succeeded the Conquerour and in King Henry the First his Brother in King Stephen King John and others who by only Admission of the Realm were Kings against the Order of Succession as after more at large I shall shew you in a particular speech of this point I shall make unto you and very specially it may be seen in the two Examples before-mentioned of the Admission of the two Kings Henry and Edward both sirnamed the Fourth whose entrances to the Crown if a man do well consider he shall find that both of them founded the best part and the surest of their Titles upon the Election Consent and Good-Will of the People yea both of them at their dying-days having some remorse of Conscience as it seemed for that they had caused so many men to die for maintainance of their several Rights and Titles had no better way to appease their own minds but by thinking that they were placed in that Room by the Voice of the Realm and consequently might lawfully defend the same and punish such as went about to deprive them Moreover you shall find if you look into the Doings of Princes in all Ages that such Kings as were most Politick and had any least doubt or suspicion of Troubles about the Title after their Deaths have caused their sons to be Crowned in their own days trusting more to this than to their Title by Succession though they were never so lawfully and lineally descended And of this I could alledge you many Examples out of divers Countreys but especially in France since the last line of Capetus came unto that Crown for this did Hugh Capetus himself to procure to be done to Robert his eldest Son in his own days and the like did King Robert procure for his younger son Henry the First as Gerard holdeth and excluded his Elder only by Crowning Henry in his own days Henry also did intreat the States of France as before you have heard to admit and Crown Philip the First his Eldest Son whilst himself reigned and this man's Son Luys le Cros did the same also unto two Sons of his First to Philip and after his death to Luys the younger which is the seventh of that name for more assuring of his Son named Philip the Second intreated the Realm to Admit and Crown him also in his own days with that great solemnity which in the former Chapter hath been declared And for this very same cause of Security it is not to be doubted but that always the Prince of Spain is sworn and admitted by the Realm during his Father's Reign as before hath been said The same consideration also moved King David to Crown his son Solomon in his own days as afterwards more in particular shall be declared and finally our King Henry also the second of England considering the alteration that the Realm had made in admitting King Stephen before him against the Order of Lineal Succession by propinquity of Bloud and fearing the like might happen also after him caused his eldest son named likewise Henry to be Crowned in his life time so as England had two King Henrys living at one time with equal Authority and this was done in the 16 year of his Reign and in the year of our Lord 1170. But his Device had no good success for that King Henry the Younger made War soon after upon King Henry the Elder and had both the Kings of France and Scotland and many Nobles of England and Normandy to take his part for which cause it is thought that this thing hath never been put in practice again since that time in England but yet hereby it is evident what the opinion of the world was in those days of the force of Coronation and Admission of the Commonwealth and how little Propinquity of Bloud prevaileth without that And for more ample proof hereof and fuller conclusion of all the whole matter I had thought to have laid down also in this place some number of the most notorious Examples that I have read for I have read many wherein the Common-wealth upon just Occasions hath extended her Authority to alter the natural course of Succession by Birth but for that the thing requireth some little study and looking over some Notes that I have taken out of Stories for help of Memory I shall deferr it until our next Meeting at what time I shall by God's Grace make this point very clear and so end my whole Discourse for I see that I have been much longer than at the beginning I purposed and now I desire much to give place unto our Temporal Lawyer here present who I doubt not hath matter to say of more delectation and pleasure than this though you of your courtesies have done me so much favour as to hear me hitherto with patience and attention Whereunto the whole company answered that not with patience but with great pleasure delight and contentation they had heard him and so they would do the Temporal Lawyer also in his turn But yet they desired him that nothing of this discourse might be omitted but wholly finished for that it gave very great satisfaction to all and opened many important Points unto them which they had never thought of before and with this they parted for that night every man unto his Lodging and Habitation CHAP. VII How the next in Succession by Propinquity of Bloud hath often-times been put back by the Cemmonwealth and other further off admitted in their
other most dear as before hath been declared neither do any of the four antient Bishops Historiographers of Spain to wit that of Toledo Beza Salamanca or Ture that lived all about those days and wrote the Story reprehend this fact of the Realm of Spain or put any doubt whether it were lawful or not for the causes before-recited True it is that after three years reign this King Vermudo being weary of Kingly life and feeling some scruple of Conscience that being Deacon he had forsaken the life Ecclesiastical and married though by dispensation of the Pope as Morales saith and entangled himself with the affairs of a Kingdom he resigned willingly the Government unto his said Cousin Don Alonso the Chaste and himself lived after a Private Life for divers Years But this Don Alonso who now the fourth time had been deprived of his Succession as you have seen deceived the expectation of the Spaniards that accounted him a Monk for he proved the most valiant and excellent King that ever that Nation had both for his vertue valour victories against the Moores building of Towns Castles Churches Monasteries and other such Works of Christianity as Morales recounteth and he reigned after his last Admission one and fifty years and had great friendship with King Charles the Great of France who lived in the same time with him And this man among other most noble Exploits so tamed the Moors of his Countrey as during his days he never paid that cruel and horrible Tribute which before and after was paid by the Christians to the Moors which was an hundred young Maids and fifty Sons of Gentlemen every Year to be brought up in the Religion of Mahomet among those Infidel Tyrants And finally this man after so much Affliction came to be one of the most renowned Princes of the World After this Don Alonso who left no Children for that he would never marry but lived all his Life in Chastity there succeeded to him by Election his Nephew named Don Ramiro son to the former said King Don Vermudo the Deacon that gave this Man the Crown as you have heard of whose Election Morales writeth these words Muerto el Rey Don Alonso el casto sue eligido por los perlados y grandes del reyno el Rey Don Ramiro primero deste nombre hyio del Rey Don Vermudo el diacono That is the King Don Alonso the chast being dead there was chosen King by the Prelats and Nobility of the Realm Don Ramiro the first of this Name son of King Vermudo the Deacon who resigned his Crown to Don Alonso and it is to be noted that albeit this Don Ramiro was next in Bloud to the Succession after the death of his Uncle Don Alonso without Children yet was he chosen by the States as here it is said in express words Moreover it is to be noted that albeit this Author Ambrosio Morales and other Spanish Writers do say that in the time of this King Ramiro the Law of Succession by propinquity in â—loud was so revived and strongly consumed that as the Kingdom of Spain was made as Majorasgo as he termeth it which is an Inheritance so entailed and tied only to the next in bloud as there is no possibility to alter the same and that from this time forward the King always caused his Eldest son to be named King or Prince and so ever to be sworn by the Realm and Nobility yet shall we find this Ordinance and Succession oftentimes to have been broken upon several considerations as this Author himself in that very chapter confesseth As for Example after some descents from this man which were Don Ordonio the first this man's son and Don Alonso the Third Don Garzia and Don Ordonio the Second all four Kings by Orderly Succession it happened that in the Year of Christ 924 Don Ordonio the Second dying left four Sons and one Daughter lawfully begotten and yet the State of Spain displaced them all and gave the Kingdom to their Uncle Don Fruela second brother to their Father Don Ordonio and Morales saith that there appeareth no other reason hereof but only for that these Sons of the King deceased were young and not so apt to Govern well the Realm as their Uncle was But after a Years Reign this King Fruela dyed also and left divers Children at mans Estate and then did the Spaniards as much against them as they had done for him before against the Children of his Elder Brother For they put them all by the Crown and chose for their King Don Alonso the Fourth which was eldest son to Don Ordonio the Second before-named that had been last King saving one and this man also I mean Don Alonso the Fourth leaving afterwards his Kingdom and betaking himself to a Religious habit offered to the Commonwealth of Spain his eldest Son lawfully begotten named Don Ordonio to be their King but they refused him and took his Brother I mean this Kings Brother and Uncle to the young Prince named Don Ramiro who reigned 19 Years and was a most excellent King and gained Madrid from the Moors though noted for Cruelty for imprisoning and pulling out the eyes afterwards of this King Don Alonso the Fourth and all his Children and Nephews for that he would have left his Habit and returned to be King again But this Fact my Author Morales excuseth saying that it was requisite for the peace and safety of the Realm so as here you see two most manifest alterations of Lineal Succession together by Order of the Commonwealth Furthermore after this Noble King Don Ramiro the Second succeeded as Heir apparent to the Crown his elder Son Don Ordinio the Third of this name in the Year of our Saviour 950. But this Succession endured no longer than unto his own death which was after seven years for then albeit he left a Son named El Enfante Don Vermudo yet he was not admitted but rather his Brother Don Sancho the First of this Name sirnamed El Gordo who was Uncle to the young Prince and the reason of this Alteration Morales giveth in these express words el succeder en el regno al hermano fue por la racon ordinaria de ser el enfante Don Vermudo nino y no bastante para el govierno y difenca de la terra Which is the cause why the Kings Brother and not his son succeeded in the Crown was for the ordinary reason so often before alledged for that the Infant or young Prince Vermudo was a little child and not sufficient for the Government and Defence of the Countrey Truth it is that after this Don Sancho had reigned and his Son and Heir named Don Ramiro the Third after him for the space of thirty years in all then was this youth Don Vermudo that is now put back called by the Realm to the Succession of the Crown and made King
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 oâ— 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 Fergaâ—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 oâ— 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
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 â—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 Batteâ— of Ageâ—couâ—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
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
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 Hâ—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 Câ—urtâ—â—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 extiâ—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 Nâ—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 wiâ—â— 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 Mâ—â—â—ray Duke of Norfolk de la Poole Duke of Suffolk the Earl of Saâ—isâ—uâ—y and the Earl of Warwiâ—k of all which the event was this John Moubray Duke of Nâ—rfolk the first considerate of the House of York died soon after the exaltation of Edward the fourth without Issue and so that name
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 â—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
places even in those Kingdoms where Succession prevaileth with many Examples of the Kingdoms of Israel and Spain AT the next Meeting the Civilian came in very pensive as though his head had been full of study where being asked the reason he answered that he had revolved many Stories since his departure about the point which he promised to treat of and that he had found such store and great variety of matter as he knew not well where to end For quoth he if I should begin with the Grecian Kings before-mentioned it were infinite that might be alledged and perhaps some man would say they were too too old and far-fetched Examples and cannot be Presidents to us in these ages and if I lay before you the Examples of Roman Kings and Emperours put in and out against the Law and Right of Succession the same men perhaps will answer that it was by force and injury of mutinous Souldiers whereunto that Common-wealth was greatly subject And if I should bring forth any Presidents and Examples of Holy Scriptures some others might chance to reply that this was by particular priviledge wherein God Almighty would deal and dispose of things against the ordinary course of mans saw as best liked himself whose will is more than saw and whose Actions are right it self for that he is Lord of all and to be limited by no Rule or Law of man but yet that this is not properly the Act of a Commonwealth as our Question demandeth Thus I say it may be that some man would reply and therefore having store enough of plain and evident matter which hath no exception for that it hath happened in settled Commonwealths and those nearer home where the Law of Succession is received and established to wit in Spain France and England but yet putting you in mind before I pass any further that it is a matter much to be marked how God dealt is this point with the people of Israel at the beginning after he had granted to them that they should have the same Government of Kings that other Nations round about them had whose Kings did ordinarily reign by Succession as ours do at this day and as all the Kings of the Jews did afterwards and yet this notwithstanding God at the beginning to wit at the very entrance of their first Kings would shew plainly that this Law of Succeeding of the one the other by Birth and propinquity of Bloud though for the most part it should prevail yet that it was not so precisely necessary but that upon just causes it might be altered For proof whereof we are to consider that albeit he made Saul a true and lawful King over the Jewes and consequently also gave him all Kingly Priviledges Benefits and Prerogatives belonging to that Degree and State whereof one Principal as you know is to have his children succeed after him in the Crown Yet after his death God suffered not any one of his generation to succeed him though he left behind him many children and among others Ishbosheth a Prince of 40 years of age whom Abner the General Captain of that Nation with eleven Tribes followed for a time as their Lawful Lord and Master by Succession until God checked them for it and induced them to reject him though Heir apparent by descent and to cleave to David newly elected King who was a stranger by Birth and no Kin at all to the King deceased And if you say here that this was for the sin of Saul whom God hath rejected I do confess it but yet this is nothing against our purpose for that we pretend not that a Prince that is next in Bloud can justly be put back except it be for his own defects or those of his Ancestors And moreover I would have you consider that by this it is evident that the fault of the Father may prejudicate the Sons Right to the Crown albeit the Son have no part in the fault as we may see in this example not only of Ishbosheth that was punished and deprived for the offence of Saul his Father notwithstanding he had been proclaimed King as hath been said but also of Jonathan's Saul's son who was so good a man and so much praised in Holy Scripture and yet he being slain in War and leaving a son named Mephibosheth he was put back also though by nearness of Bloud he had great Interest in the Succession as you see and much before David But David being placed in the Crown by Election free Consent and Admission of the People of Israel as the scripture plainly testifies though by motion and direction of God himself we must confess and no man I think will deny but that he had given unto him therewith all Kingly Priviledges Preheminâ—nces and Regalities even in the highest degree as was convenient to such a state and among others the Scripture expressly nameth that in particular it was assured him by God that his Seed should Reign after â—im yea and that for ever but yet we do not find this to be performed to any of 〈◊〉 persons as by Order of Succession it should seem to appertain 〈◊〉 nor to any of their off-spring or descents but only to Solomon which was his younger and tenth son and the fourth only by 〈◊〉 as before hath been touched True it is that the Scripture recounteth how Adonias David's elder son that was of rare beauty and a very Godly young Prince seeing his Father now very old and impotent and to lye on his Death bed and himself Heir apparent by antiquity of Bloud after the death of Absalom his elder brother that was slain before he had determined to have proclaimed himself Heir apparent in Jerusalem before his Father dyed and for that purpose had ordained a great Assembly and Banquet had called unto it both the High-Priest Abiathar and divers of the Clergy as also the General Captain of all the Army of Israel named Joab with others of the Nobility and with them all the rest of his Brethren that were sons to King David saving only Solomon together with many other Princes and great Men both Spiritual and Temporal of that Estate and had prepared for them a great Feast as I have said meaning that very day to proclaim himself Heir apparent to the Crown and to be Crowned as indeed by Succession of bloud it appertained unto him and this he attempted so much the rather by counsil of his Friends for that he saw the King his Father very old and impotent and ready to dye and had taken no order at all for his Successor and moreover Adonias had understood how that Barsabee Solomon's Mother had some hope to have her son reign after David upon a certain promise that David in his youth had made unto her thereof as also she had in the special favour and friendship which Nathan the Prophet and Zadok the Priest who could do much with
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 Blâ—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 heâ—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 Eâ—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
Richard and Reigned 13. years by the name of King Henry the fourth and was the first King of the House of Lancaster of the right of whose title examination shall be made afterwards The first of the two daughters which John of Gaunt had by Blanch was named Philippa who was married to John the first of â—hat name King of Portugal by whom she had Issue Edward King of Portugal and he Alfonsus the fifth and he John the second and so one after another even unto our days The second daughter of John of Gaunt by Lady Blanch was named Elizabeth who was married to John Holland Duke of Exeter and she had Issue by him another John Duke of Exeter and he had Issue Henry Duke of Exeter that died without Issue Male leaving only one Daughter named Anne who was married to Sir Thomas Nevil Knight and by him had Issue Ralph Nevil third Earl of Westmerland whose Lineal Heir is at this day Lord Charles Nevil Earl of Westmerland that liveth banished in Flanders And this is all the Issue that John of Gaunt had by Lady Blanch his first Wife saving only that I had forgotten to prosecute the Issue of Henry his first Son surnamed of Bullenbroke that was afterward called K. Henry the fourth which King had four Sons and two daughters his daughters were Blanch and Philippa the first married to William Duke of Bavaria and the second to Erick King of Denmark and both of them died without Children The four Sons were first Henry that Reigned after him by the name of Henry the fifth and the second was Thomas Duke of Clarence the third was John Duke of Bedford and the fourth was Humphry Duke of Glocester all which three Dukes died without Issue or were slain in Wars of the Realm so as only King Henry the fifth their elder Brother had Issue one Son named Henry also that was King and Reigned 40 years by the name of Henry the sixth who had Issue Prince Edward and both of them I mean both Father and Son were murthered by order or permission of Edward Duke of York who afterward took the Crown upon him by the name of King Edward the fourth as before hath been said so as in this King Henry the sixth and his Son Prince Edward ended all the bloud-Royal male of the House of Lancaster by Blanch the first Wife of John of Gaunt and the Inheritance of the said Lady Blanch returned by right of succession as the favourers of the House of Portugal affirm though others deny it unto the Heirs of Lady Philip her eldest daughter married into Portugal whose Nephew named Alfonsus the fifth King of Portugal lived at that day when King Henry the sixth and his Heir were made away and thus much of John of Gaunt's first marriage But after the death of the Lady Blanch John of Gaunt married the Lady Constance daughter and Hâ—ir of Peter the first surnamed the Cruel King of Castile who being driven out of his Kingdom by Henry his Bastard-brother assisted thereunto by the French he fled to Bourdeaux with his Wife and two daughters where he found Prince Edward eldest Son to King Edward the third by whom he was restored and for pledge of his fidelity and performance of other conditions that the said King Peter had promised to the Prince he left his two daughters with him which daughters being sent afterwards into England the eldest of them named Constance was married to John of Gaunt and by her Title he named himself for divers years afterwards King of Castile and went to gain the same by Arms when Peter her Father was slain by his foresaid Bastard-brother But yet some years after that again there was an agreement made between the said John of Gaunt and John the first of that name King of Castile Son and Heir of the foresaid Henry the Bastard with condition that Catharine the only daughter of John of Gaâ—nt by Lady Constance should marry with Henry the third Prince of Castile Son and Heir of the said King John and Nephew to the Bastard Henry the second and by this means was ended that controversie between England and Castile And the said Lady Catharine had Issue by King Henry John the second King of Casâ—â—â—e and he Isabel that married with Ferdinando the Catholick King of Aragon and joyned by that marriage both those Kingdoms together and by him she had a daughter named Joan that married Philip Duke of Austria and Burgundy and by him had Charles the such that was Emperor and Father to King Philip that now reigneth â—n Spain who as we see is descided two ways from John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster to wit by two daughters begotten of two Wives Blanch and Constance neither had John of Gaunt any more Children by Constance but only this daughter Catharine of whom we have spoken wherefore now we shall speak of his third Wife that was Lady Catharine Swinford This Lady Catharine as English Histories do note was born in Heinalt in Flanders and was daughter to a Knight of that Country called Sir Payne de Ruet and she was brought up in her youth in the Duke of Lancasters house and attended upon his first Wife Lady Blanch and being fair of personage grew in such favour with the Duke as in the time of his second Wife Constance he kept this Catharine for his Concubine and begat upon her four Children to wit three Sons and â— daughter which daughter whose name was Jane was married to Ralph Earl of Westmorland called commonly in those days Daw Raby of whom descended the Earls of Westmorland that ensued His three Sons were John Thomas and Henry and John was first Earl and then Duke of Summerset Thomas was first Marques of Dorset and then Duke of Excester Henry was Bishop of Winchester and after Cardinal And after John of Gaunt had begotten all these four Children upon Catharine he married her to a Knight in England named Swinford which Knight lived not many years after and John of Gaunt coming home to England from Aquitaine where he had been for divers years and seeing this old Conâ—â—â—â—ne of his Catharine to be now a Widow and himself also without a Wife for that the Lady Constance was dead a little before for the love that he bore to the Children that he had begotten of her he determined to marry her and thereby the rather to legitimate her Children though himself were old now and all his Kindred utterly against the Marriage and so not full two years before his death to wit in the Year of Christ 1396. he married her and the next Year after in a Parliament begun at Westminster the 22 of January Anno Domini 1397. he caused all his said Children to be legitimated which he had begotten upon this Lady Swinford before she was his Wife But now to go forward to declare the Issue of these three Sons of John of Gaunt by Catharine
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 Agencâ—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 wâ—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 Sâ—â—â— 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
same House as descended by the daughter of the first Brother Edward Duke of York and King of England and then the Earl of Huntington and his generation as also the Pools Barringtons and others before named are or may be Titlers of York as descended of George Duke of Clarence second Son of Richard Duke of York all which Issue yet seem to remain only within the compass of the House of York for that by the former Pedegree of the House of Lancaster it seemeth to the favourers of this House that none of these other Competitors are properly of the Line of Lancaster for that King Henry the 7th coming only of John of Gaunt by Catharine Swinford his third Wife could have no part in Lady Blanch that was only Inheritor of that House as to these men seemeth evident Only then it remaineth for the ending of this Chapter to explain somewhat more clearly the descent of King Henry the 7th and of his Issue For better understanding whereof you must consider that King Henry the 7th being of the House of Lancaster in the manner that you have heard and marrying Elizabeth the eldest daughter of the contrary House of York did seem to joyn both Houses together and make an end of that bloudy controversie though others now will say no But howsoever that was which after shall be examined clear it is that he had by that marriage one only Son that left Issue and two daughters his Son was King Henry the 8th who by three several Wives had three Children that have reigned after him to wit King Edward the 6th by Queen Jane Seymer Queen Mary by Queen Catharine of Spain and Queen Elizabeth by Queen Anne Bullen of all which three Children no Issue hath remained so as now we must return to consider the Issue of his daughters The eldest daughter of King Henoy the seventh named Margaret was married by her first mariage to James the fourth King of Scots who had Issue James the fifth and he again Lady Mary late Queen of Scots and Dowager of France put to death not long ago in England who left Issue James the sixth now King of Scots And by her second marriage the said Lady Margaret after the death of King James the fourth took for husband Archibald Douglas Earl of Angus in Scotland by whom she had one only daughter named Margaret which was married to Matthew Steward Earl of Lenox and by him she had two Sons to wit Henry Lord Darly and Charles Steward Henry married the foresaid Lady Mary Queen of Scotland and was murthered in Edenbrough in the year 1566. as the World knoweth and Charles his Brother married Elizabeth the daughter of Sir William Candish in England by whom he had one only daughter yet living named Arabella another competitor of the Crown of England by the House of York and thus much of the first daughter of King Henry the seventh Mary the second daughter of King Henry the seventh and younger Sister to King Henry the eighth was married first to Lewis the XII King of France by whom she had no Issue and afterward to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk by whom she had two daughters to wit Frances and Eleanor the Lady Frances was married first to Henry Gray Marquess of Dorset and after Duke of Suffolk beheaded by Queen Mary and by him she had three daughters to wit Jane Catharine and Mary the Lady Jane eldest of the three was married to Lord Guilford Dudly Son to John Dudly late Duke of Northumberland with whom I mean with her Husband and Father in Law she was beheaded soon after for being proclaimes Queen upon the death of King Edward the sixth the Lady Catharine second daughter married first the Lord Henry Herbert Earl of Pembroke and left by him again she dyed afterward in the Tower where she was prisoner for having had two Children by Edward Seymer Earl of Hertford without sufficient proof that she was married unto him and the two Children are yet living to wit Henry Seymer commonly called Lord Beacham and Edward Seymer his Brother The Lady Mary the third Sister though she was betrothed to Arthur Lord Gray of Wilton and married after to Martin Keyes Gentleman-Porter yet hath she left no Issue as far as I understand This then is the end of the Issue of Lady Frances first of the two daughters of Queen Mary of France by Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk for albeit the said Lady Frances after the beheading of the said Henry Lord Gray Duke of Suffolk her first Husband married again one Adrian Stokes her Servant and had a Son by him yet it lived not but dyed very soon after Now then to speak of the younger daughter of the said French Queen and Duke named Eleanor she was married to Henry Clifford Earl of Cumberland who had by her a daughter named Margaret that was married to Lord Henry Stanley Earl of Darby by whom she hath a plentiful Issue as Ferdinand now Earl of Darby William Stanley Francis Stanley and others and this is all that needeth to be spoken of these descents of our English Kings Princes Peers or Competitors to the Crown for this place and therefore now it resteth only that we begin to examine what different pretentions are fram'd by divers Parties upon these descents and Genealogies which is the principal point of this our discourse CHAP. IV. Of the great and general controversie and contention between the two Houses Royal of Lancaster and York and which of them may seem to have had the better Right to the Crown by way of Succession ANd first of all before I do descend to treat in particular of the different pretences of several persons and families that have issued out of these two Royal lineages of Lancaster and York it shall perhaps not be amiss to discuss with some attention what is or hath or may be said on both sides for the general controversie that lyeth between them yet undecided in many mens opinions notwithstanding there hath been so much stir about the same and not only writing and disputing but also fighting and murthering for many years And truly if we look into divers Histories Records and Authors which have written of this matter we shall find that every one of them speaking commonly according to the time wherein they lived for that all such as wrote in the time of the three Henries fourth fifth and sixth Kings of the House of Lancaster they make the title of Lancaster very clear and undoubted but such others as wrote since that time while the House of York hath held the Scepter they have spoken in a far different manner as namely Polydor that wrote in King Henry the VIII his time and others that have followed him since to take all right from the House of Lancaster and give the same to the House of York wherefore the best way I suppose will be not so much to consider
you have heard it proved of all Law-makers Philosophers Lawyers Divines and Governours of Commonwealhs who have set down in their Statutes and Ordinances that Kings shall swear and protest at their entrance to Government that they will observe and perform the conditions there promised and otherwise to have no Interest in that Dignity and Soveraignty By examples in like manner of all Realms Christian he declared how that often-times they have deposed their Princes for just causes and that God hath concurred and assisted wonderfully the same sending them commonly very good Kings after those that were deprived and in no Country more then in England it self yea in the very Line and Family of this King Richard whose Noble Grandfather King Edward the third was exalted to the Crown by a most solemn deposition of his predecessor King Edward the second wherefore in this point there can be little controversie and therefore we shall pass unto the second which is whether the causes were good and just for which this King Richard was esteemed worthy to be deposed And in this second point much more difference there is betwixt York and Lancaster and between the white Rose and the Red for that the House of York seeking to make the other odious as though they had entred by tyranny and cruelty doth not stick to avouch that King Richard was unjustly deposed but against this the House of Lancaster alledgeth first that the House of York cannot justly say this for that the chief Prince assistant to the deposing of King Richard was Lord Edmond himself Duke of York and head of that family together with Edward Earl of Rutland and Duke of Aumarl his eldest Son and Heir yea and his younger Son also Richard Earl of Cambridge Father to this Richard that now pretendeth for so do write both Stow Hollingshead and other Chroniclers of England that those Princes of the Hâ—â—â—e of York did principally assist Henry Duke of Lancaster in getting the Crown and deposing King Richard and Polidâ—r speaking of the wicked Government of King Richard and of the first Cogitation about deposing him when King Henry of Lancaster was yet in France banished and seemed not to think of any such matter he hath these words Sed Edmundo Eboâ—acensium duci ea res cum primis bilem commovit quod Rex omnia jam jura perverteret quod antea parricidio postea râ—pints se obstrinxâ—sset c. That is this matter of the wicked Government of King Richard did principally offend his Uncle Edmond Duke of York for that he saw the King now to peâ—srvert all Law and Equity and that as before he had defiled himself with Parricide that is with the murther of his own Uncle the Duke of Glocester Brother to this Edmond so now he intangled himself also with Rapine in that he took by violence the Goods and Inheritance of John of Gaunt late deceased which did belong to Henry Duke of Lancaster his Cousin-German By which words of Polidor as also for that the Duke of Lancaster coming out of Britany accompaned only with threescore persons as some stories say chose first to go into York shire and to enter at Ravenspur at the mouth of Humber as all the World knoweth which he would never have done if the Princes of York had not principally favoured him in that action all this I say is an evident argument that these Princes of the House of York were then the chief doers in this deposition and consequently cannot alledge now with reason that the said Richard was deposed uniustly Secondly the House of Lancaster alledgeth for the justifying of this deposition the opinions of all Historiographers that ever have written of this matter whether they be English French Dutch Latine or of any other Nation or Language who all with one accord do affirm that King Richards Government was intolerable and he worthy of deposition whereof he that will see more let him read Thomas of Walsingham and John Frosard in the life of King Richard Thirdly they of Lancaster do alledge the particular outrages and insolencies of King Richards Government and first the suffering himself to be carried away with evil counsel of his favorites and then the perverting of all Laws generally under his Government as before you have heard out of Polidor the joyning with his Minions for oppressing the Nobility of which Stow hath these words The King being at Bristow with Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland and Michael de la Pole Earl of Suffolk devised how to take away the Duke of Glocester the Earls of Arundel Warwick Darby and Nottingham and others whose deaths they conspired Thus saith Stow. And after they executed the most part of their devices for that Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester was made away without Law or Process the Earl of Arundel also was put to death and Warwick was banished and so was also Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury by like Injustice and the like was done to Henry Duke of Hertford and after of Lancaster and among other insolencies he suffered Robert Vere to dishonour and put from him his Wife a Noble and goodly young Lady as Stow saith and born of Lady Isabella King Richards Aunt that was daughter to King Edward the third and suffered Vere to marry another openly to her disgrace and dishonour of her Kindred And finally in the last Parliament that ever he held which was in the 21. year of his Reign commonly called the Evil Parliament he would needs have all authority absolute granted to certain favourites of his which Thomas Walsingham saith were not above 6 or 7. to determine of all matters with all full authority as if they only had been the whole Realm which was nothing indeed but to take all authority to himself only and Stow in his Chronicle hath these words following This Parliament began about the 15. of Sept. in the year 1397. at the beginning whereof Edward Stafford Bishop of Exeter Lord Chancellor of England made a proposition or Sermon in which he affirmed that the power of the King was alone and perfect of it self and those that do impeach it were worthy to suffer pain of the Law c. thus saith Stow by all which is evident how exorbitant and contrary to all Law and Equity this Kings Government was Fourthly and lastly those of Lancaster do alledge for justifying of this deprivation that Duke Henry was called home by express Letters of the more and better part of all the Realm and that he came wholly in a manner uâ—â—rmed considering his person for that Frosard saith he had but three Ships only out of Britany and Walsingham saith he had but 15. Lances and 4â—0 foot-men and the additions to Polâ—â—hronicon as before I noted do avouch that when he landed at Ravenspur in the County of York he had but threescore men in all to begin the Reformation of
English Nobility to see them so greatly advanced above the rest as necessarily they must be if this Woman of their Lineage should come to be Queen which how the Nobility of England would bâ—ar is hard to say And this is as much as I have heard others say of this matter and of all the House of Scotland wherefore with this I shall end and pass over to treat also of the other Houses that do remain of such as before I named CHAP. VI. Of the House of Suffolk containing the Claims of the Countess of Darby and her Children as also of the Children of the Earl of Hartford IT hath appeared by the Genealogy set down before in the third Chapter and often-times mentioned since how that the House of Suffolk is so called for that the Lady Mary second Daughter of King Henry VII being first married to Lewis XII King of France was afterwards married to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk who being sent over to condole the death of the said King got the good will of the Widow-Queen though the common Fame of all men was That the said Charles had a Wife living at that day and divers years after as in this Chapter we shall examine more in particular By this Charles Brandon then Duke of Suffolk this Queen Mary of France had two Daughters first the Lady Frances married to Sir Henry Gray Marquess of Dorset and afterwards in the right of his Wife Duke also of Suffolk who was afterwards beheaded by Queen Mary And secondly Lady Eleanor married to Sir Henry Clifford Earl of Cumberland The Lady Frances elder Daughter of the Queen and of Charles Brandon had Issue by her Husband the said last Duke of Suffolk three Daughters to wit Jane Katharine and Mary which Mary the youngest was betrothed first to Arthur Lord Gray of Wilton and after left by him she was married to one M. Martin Keyes of Kent Gentleman-Porter of the Queens Houshold and after she died without Issue And the Lady Jane the eldest of the three Sisters was married at the same time to the Lord Guilford Dudley fourth Son to Sir John Dudley Duke of Northumberland and was proclaimed Queen after the death of King Edward for which act all three of them to wit both the Father Son and Daughter-in-law were put to death soon after But the Lady Katharine the second Daughter was married first upon the same day that the other two her Sisters were unto Lord Henry Herbert now Earl of Pembroke and upon the fall and misery of her House she was left by him and so she lived a sole Woman for divers years until in the beginning of this Queens days she was found to be with-child which she affirmed was by the Lord Edward Seymor Earl of Hartford who at that time was in France with Sir Nicholas Throgmorton the Embassador and had purpose and license to have travelled into Italy but being called home in hast upon this new accident he confessed that the Child was his and both he and the Lady affirmed that they were man and wife but for that they could not prove it by Witnesses and for attempting such a Match with one of the Blood Royal without Privity and License of the Prince they were Committed to the Tower where they procured Means to meet again afterward and had an other Child which both Children do yet live and the Elder of them is called Lord Henry Beacham and the other Edward Seymor the Mother of whom lived not long after neither married the Earl again until of late that he married the Lady Frances Howard Sister to the Lady Sheffield And this is all the Issue of the elder Daughter of Charles Brandon by Lady Mary Queen of France The second Daughter of Duke Charles and the Queen named Lady Eleanor was married to Henry Lord Clifford Earl of Cumberland and had by him a Daughter named Margaret that married Sir Henry Stanely Lord Strange and after Earl of Darby by whom the said Lady who yet liveth hath had Issue Ferdinando Stanley now Earl of Darby William and Francis Stanley And this is the Issue of the House of Suffolk to wit this Countess of Darby with her Children and these other of the Earl of Hartford of all whose Titles with their Impediments I shall here briefly give an account and reason First of all both of these Families do joyn together in this one point to exclude the House of Scotland both by foreign Birth anh by the aforesaid Testament of King Henry authorized by two Parliaments and by the other Exclusions which in each of the titles of the King of cots and of Lady Arabella hath been before-alledged But then secondly they come to vary between themselves about the Priority or Propinquity of their own Succession for the Children of the Earl of Hartford and their Friends do alledge That they do descend of Lady Frances the elder Sister of Lady Eleanor and so by Law and Reason ought to be preferred But the other House alledgeth against this two Impediments the one That the Lady Margaret Countess of Darby now living is nearer by one degree to the Stem that is to King Henry VII then are the Children of the Earl of Hartford and consequently according to that which in the former fourth Chapter hath been declared she is to be preferred albeit the Children of the said Earl were legitimate Secondly they do affirm That the said Children of the Earl of Hartford by the Lady Katharine Gray are many ways illegitimate First for that the said Lady Katharine Gray their Mother was lawfully married before to the Earl of Pembroke now living as hath been touched and publick Records do testifie and not lawfully separated nor by lawful authority nor for just Causes but only for temporal and worldly respects for that the House of Suffolk was come into misery and disgrace whereby she remained still his true Wife and before God and so could have no lawful Children by any other whiles he yet lived as yet he doth Again they prove the illegitimation of these Children of the Earl of Hartford for that it could never be lawfully proved that the said Earl and the Lady Katharine were married but only by their own assertions which in Law is not holden sufficient for which occasion the said pretended Marriage was disannulled in the Court of Arches by publick and definitive Sentence of Doctor Parker Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of England not long after the Birth of the said Children Furthermore they do add yet another Bastardy also in the Birth of Lady Katharine her self for that her Father Lord Henry Gray Marquess of Dorset was known to have a lawful Wife alive when he married the Lady Frances Daughter and Heir of the Queen of France and of Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk and Mother of this Lady Katharine for obâ—aining of which said Marriage the said Marquess put away his foresaid
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 Infanâ—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
Deprivation by the Pope that soon after ensued as also by another Deprivation made by the Barons of his Realm as after shall be touched Furthermore they say That when Arthur Duke of Britain whom to this effect they do hold to have been the only true Heir at that time to the Kingdom of England was in Prison in the Castle of Roan suspecting that he should be murthered by his said Unkle King John he nominated this Lady Blanch his Cousin-jerman to be his Heir perswading himself that he by the help of her Husband Prince Lewis of France and her Father the King of Spain should be better able to defend and recover his or her right to the Crown of England than Eleanor his own Sister should be who was also in the hands of his said Unkle for that he supposed that she should be made away by himself shortly after as indeed the French Chronicler affirmeth that she was And howsoever this matter of Duke Arthur's Testament was yet certain it is that when he and his Sister were put to death the next in Kin that could succeed them in their right to England was this Lady Blanch and her Mother Queen Eleanor that was Sister to Arthur's Father Geffrey Duke of Britany for that King John their Unkle was presumed by all men to be uncapable of their Inheritance by his putting of them to death and Child he had yet none And this is the second point that these men do deduce for the Lady Infanta of Spain by the title of Queen Eleanor and her Daughter Blanch to whom the Infanta is next Heir A third Interest also the same men do derive to the Infanta by the actual Deposition of King John by the Barons and States of this Realm in the 16 th year of his Reign and by the Election and actual Admission of Lewis Prince of France Husband of Lady Blanch whom they chose with one consent and admitted and swore him Fealty and Obedience in London for him and for his Heirs and Posterity in the year 1217. and gave him Possession of the said City and Tower of London and of many other chief places of the Realm and albeit afterwards the most part of the Realm changed their minds upon the sudden death of the said King John and chose and admitted his young Son Henry III. a Child of 9 years old yet do the favourers of the Infanta say That there remaineth to her as Heir unto the said Lewis until this day that Interest which by this Election Oath and Admission of the Realm remained unto this Prince Lewis which these men affirm to be the very like case as was that of Hugo Capetus in France who came to be King especially upon a certain Title that one of his Ancestors named Odo Earl of Paris had by being once elected King of France and admitted and sworn though afterwards he was deposed again and young Charles surnamed the Simple was admitted in his place as Henry III. was in England after the Election of Lewis But yet as the other ever continued his Right and Claim till it was restored to Hugo Capetus one of his Race so say these men may this Infanta continue and renew now the Demand of King Lewis her Ancestor for that Titles and Interests to Kingdoms once rightly gotten do never die but remain ever for the Posterity to effectuate when they can And thus much of this matter But after this again these men do shew how that the said Infanta of Spain doth descend also from Henry III. son of King John by the Dukes of Britany as before in the second Chapter hath been declared and in the Arbor and Genealogy following in the end of this Conference shall be seen for that King Henry besides his two Sons Edward and Edmond which were the beginners of the two Houses of York and Lancaster had also a Daughter named Beatrix married to John the second of that Name Duke of Britany and by him she had Arthur II. and so lineally from him have descended the Princes of that House until their Union with the Crown of France and from thence unto this Lady Infanta of Spain that now is who taketh her self for proper Heir of the said House of Britany and Heir general of France as hath been said By this Conjunction then of the House of Britany with the Bloud-Royal of England the Friends of the Infanta do argue in this manner That seeing she descendeth of the Sister of these two Brothers which were the Heads of the two opposite Houses of Lancaster and York and considering that each of these Houses hath often-times been Attainted and Excluded from the Succession by sundry Acts of Parliament and at this present are opposite and at contention among themselves why may not this right of both Houses say these men by way of Composition Peace and Comprize at least be passed over to the Issue of their Sister which resteth in the Infanta Again they say That all these three Branches of the Lines to wit by the Lady Constance Daughter of King William the Conquerour by the Lady Eleanor Daughter of King Henry II. and by the Lady Beatrix Daughter of King Henry III. it is evident that this Lady the Infanta of Spain is of the true ancient Bloud-Royal of England and that divers ways she may have Claim to the same which being granted they infer That seeing matters are so doubtful at this day about the next lawful Succession and that divers of the Pretenders are excluded some for Bastardy some other for Religion some for unaptness to Govern and some for other Causes and seeing the Commonwealth hath such Authority to dispose in this Affair as before the Civil-Lawyer hath declared why may there not Consideration be had among other Pretenders of this noble Princess also say these men especially seeing she is unmarried and may thereby commodate many matters and salve many breaches and satisfie many hopes and give contentment to many desires as the world knoweth And this is in effect as much as I have heard alledged hitherto in favour of the Infanta of Spain but against this Pretence others do produce divers Arguments and Objections As first of all That these her Claims be very old and worn out and are but Collateral by Sisters Secondly That she is a Stranger and Alien born Thirdly That her Religion is contrary to the State Unto all which Objections the favourers aforesaid do make their Answers And to the first they say That Antiquity hurteth not the goodness of a Title when occasion is offered to advance the same especially â—n Titles belonging to Kingdoms which commonly are never presumed to die as hath been said and nullum tempus occurrit Regi saith our Law And as for Collateral Lines they say That they may lawfully be admitted to enter when the direct Lines do either fail or are excluded for other just respects as in our Case they hold that
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 wiâ—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 Countâ—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 pâ—â—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
Lancaster Joan eldest Daughter married to L. Mowbray Mary second Daughter married to Hen. L. Percy Hen. 2d Son Earl of Lancaster Darby and Lâ—icester H. II. 1st D. of Lancaster made by Edward III. J. of Ga. 3d. Son of Ed. D. of Lanâ— 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 Wâ—les slain by the house of York Eleanor 3â— Daughter married to â— E. of Arunâ—el The 1st Son Earl of Lancaster died without issue John the 3d. Son Earl of Darby Edmond Crockbâ—â—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 fâ—om whom bâ—gan the â—â—uses of Lan â— 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 â—â—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 Siâ— 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 â—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 Aragâ—n sirnam'd Cathaâ— 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 Savâ—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 Theâ—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 â— L. Staf. whereby they become Duke of Bucks The House of YORK Richard â—d Son D. of York husband of Ann Ann Mort. mar the D. of York by which they claim R. Plantagâ—net D. of York 1 st pretendâ—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. Pâ—ol Reginald Pool died Cardinal so England Hon. I. Mâ—â—tague â—â—t Son put to death by Henry VIII Winifred 2d daughter maried to S. T. Barington Catharine married to S. F. Hâ—stings E. of Hunting H. Hastings â—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 3â— Wife to John of Gaunt John Earl of Somerset John Duke of Somerset Margaret married to Edm. Tuder â— of â—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. â—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 Bâ—aâ—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 â— 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.
his Realm against so potent a Tyrant as King Richard was then accounted and yet was the concourse of all people so great and general unto him that within few days he atchieved the matter and that without any battel or bloud-shed at all and thus much for the justness of the cause But now if we will consider the manner and form of this act they of Lancaster do affirm also that it could not be executed in better nor more convenient order First for that it was done by the choice and invitation of all the Realm or greater and better part thereof as hath been said Secondly for that it was done without slaughter and thirdly for that the King was deposed by Act of Parliament and himself convinced of his unworthy Government and brought to confess that he was worthily deprived and that he willingly and freely resigned the same neither can there be any more circumstances required say these men for any lawful deposition of a Prince And if any man will yet object and say that notwithstanding all this there was violence for that Duke Henry was Armed and by force of Arms brought this to pass they of Lancaster do answer that this is true that he brought the matter to an end by Forces for that an evil King cannot be removed but by force of Arms if we expect the ordinary way of remedy left by God unto the Commonwealth for seeing that a Tyrannical or obstinate evil Prince is an Armed enemy with his feet set on the Realms head certain it is that he cannot be driven nor plucked from thence nor brought in order but by force of Arms. And if you say that God may remedy the matter otherwise and take him away by sickness and other such means it is answered that God will not always bind himself to work Miracles or to use extraordinary means in bringing those things to pass which he hath left in the hands of men and of Commonwealths to effectuate by ordinary way of Wisdom and Justice As for example it were an easie thing say these men for God Almighty also when any wicked man breaketh his Law by theft murther or the like to punish him immediately by death or otherwise himself and yet he will not so do but will have the Realm to punish him and that by force of Arms also it otherwise it cannot be done and this as well for example and terror of 〈…〉 that God hath 〈…〉 in his name 〈…〉 〈…〉 particular president of punishing of evil 〈◊〉 in like manner by force and violence when other means will not serve these men say that besides all the great multitude of examples alledged before by the Lawyer in his fourth Chapter about evil Kings deposed there is great variety of several manners how the same hath been done by God's own Ordinance recounted in Holy Writ as first when the Scripture saith in the Books of Judges that Aod was stirred up by God to kill Eglon King of the Moabites that prosecuted the people of Israel and the manner was to feign a secret Embassage or message unto him and so to slay him in his Chamber as he did and God delivered his people by that means and chose this particular way whereas none will deny but that he might have done it by many other means less odious to the World then this was that seemed so cruel and full of Treason Again they shew that when God had rejected King Saul for his wickedness and determined to depose him he chose to do it by raising of David against him and by defending and assisting David both in Arms and otherwise divers years against Saul and in the end raised the Philistians also against him who after divers battels cut off his head and carried it up and down the Country upon a pole and presented it in all the Temples of their Idols and in the end left it pitched up in the Temple of Dagon all which God might have spared and have taken him away quietly without bloudshed if he would but he chose this second way In like manner when he would punish King Rehoboam for the sins of Solomon his Father and yet spare him also in part for the sake of his Grandfather David he caused a Rebellion to be raised against him by Jeroboam his Servant and more then three parts of four of his people to rebel against him and this by God's own instinct and motion and by his express allowance thereof after it was done as the Scripture avoucheth and if Rehoboam had fought against them for this fault as once he had thought to do and was prepared with a main Army no doubt but they might have lawfully slain him for that now these ten Tribes that forsook him had just authority to depose him for his evil Government and for not yielding to their just request made unto him for easing them of those grievous Tributes laid upon them as the Scripture reporteth For albeit God had a meaning to punish him for the sins of his Father Solomon yet suffered he that Rehoboam also should give just occasion himself for the people to leave him as appeareth by the story and this is God's high Wisdom Justice Providence and sweet disposition in humane affairs Another example of punishing and deposing evil Princes by force they do alledge out of the first Book of Kings where God appointed Elizeus the Prophet to send the Son of another Prophet to anoint Jehu Captain of Joram King of Israel which Joram was Son to the Queen Jezabel and to perswade Jehu to take Arms against his said King and against his mother the Queen and to deprive them both not only of their Kingdoms but also of their lives and so he did for the Scripture saith Conjuravit ergo Jehu contra Joram Jehu did conjure and conspire at the perswasion of this Prophet with the rest of his fellow Captains against his King Joram and Queen Jezabel the Kings Mother to put them down and to put them to death with all the ignominy he could devise and God allowed thereof and perswaded the same by so holy a Prophet as Elizeus was whereby we may assure our selves that the fact was not only lawful but also most Godly albeit in it self it might seem abominable And in the same book of Kings within two chapters after there is another example how God moved Jehoiadah High-priest of Jerusalem to perswade the Captains and Colonels of that City to conspire against Athalia the Queen that had Reigned 6. years and to Arm themselves with the Armor of the Temple for that purpose and to besiege the Palace where she lay and to kill all them that should offer or go about to defend her and so they did and having taken her alive she was put to death also by sentence of the said High-priest and the fact was allowed by God and highly commended in the Scripture and Joas