Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
death_n henry_n king_n marry_v 5,109 5 9.3955 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A91489 A treatise concerning the broken succession of the crown of England: inculcated, about the later end of the reign of Queen Elisabeth. Not impertinent for the better compleating of the general information intended. Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610. 1655 (1655) Wing P574; Thomason E481_2; ESTC R203153 79,791 168

There are 12 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Parlament Holden at Segovia 1276. made Heir apparent of Spain and they put back in their Grand-father's time and by his and the Realms consent And this Don Sancho coming to the Crown in the year 1284. the two Princes were put in Prison but afterwards at the suit of Philip 3. of France their Uncle they were let out and endued with certain Lands and also they remain unto this day And of these do come the Dukes of Medina Celi and all the rest of the House of Cerda which are of much Nobilitie in Spain at this time and King Philip that Reigneth cometh of Don Sancho the yonger Brother Henry the Bastard and his Race to the prejudice of King Petro and his Heirs When Don Pedro the Cruel King of Castile was driven and his Bastard Brother Henry 2. set up in his place John of Gant Duke of Lancaster having Married Dona Constancia the said King Peter's Daughter and Heir pretended by succession the said Crown of Castile as indeed it appertained unto him But yet the State of Spain denied it flatly and defended it by Arms and prevailed against John of Gand as did also the Race of Henry the Bastard against his lawful Brother And though in this Third and principal Discent of the Kings of Spain when these Changes happened the matter of Succession were most assuredly and perfectly established yet no man will deny but that the Kings of Spain who hold by the latter Titles at this day be true and lawful Kings This King Henry the Bastard had a Son named John the first who succeeded him in the Crown of Spain and Married Dona Beatrix Daughter and Heir of King Ferdinando the first of Portugal But yet after the death of the said Ferdinando the States of Portugal would never agree to admit the said Juan for their King for not subjecting themselves by that means to the Castilians And took rather a Bastard Brother of the said Don Ferdinando named Don Juan a youth of twenty years old whom they Married afterward to the Lady Philippe Daughter of John of Gand by his first Wife Blancha Duchess and Heir of Lancaster in whose Right the Kings of Portugal and their Discendents do pretend unto this day a certain interest to the House of Lancaster Divers other Examples out of the States of France and England for proof that the next in Blood are somtimes put back from succession And how God hath approved the same with good success CAP. VIII Though the Crown of France never come to any Stranger yet it Changed twice in it self and had Three Rancks COncerning the State of France albeit since the entrance of their first King Pharamond they have never had any stranger come to wear their Crown yet among themselves have they changed twice their whole Lineage of Kings and have had three Discents and Races as well as the Spaniards The first of Pharamond the second of Pepin and the third of Capitus which endureth unto this present The First Ranck The First Ranck shall be let pass for that some perhaps may say that the Common-wealth and Law of Succession was not then so well setled as it hath been since and also because it were too tedious to peruse all the Three Rancks for the store that they may yield Examples of the second Ranck Carloman against the Law of Succession and the Order of his Father parted equally the Realm with his elder Brother Charles Pepin le Bref first King of the second Race left two Sons Charles and Carloman and his States and Kingdoms by Succession unto the eldest Charles the Great And albeit by that Law of Succession the whole Kingdom of France appertained unto him alone yet the Realm by his authoritie did part it equally between them two as Gerard du Haillan setteth down in these words Estant Pepin decedé les François eslurent Roy Charles Carloman ses fils à la charge qu'ils partagerrient entr'evor egalement le Roy And the very same citeth Belforest out of Egenart an ancient French Writer Charlemayne preferred to his nephews against succession After three years reign Carloman dying left many sons the elder whereof was named Adalgise but Belforest saith That the Lords Ecclesiastical and temporal of France swore fidelitie and obedience to Charles without any respect or regard at all of the children of Carloman who yet by right of succession should have been preferred And Paulus Emilius a Latine-writer saith Proceres regni ad Carolum ultrà venientes regem eum totius Galliae salutârunt whereby is shewed that exclusion of the children of Carloman was not by force or tyrannie but by free deliberation of the Realm Lewis 1. deposed Charles le Chauve his fourth son admitted to the prejudice of his elder brothers To Charles the Great succeeded Lewis le Debonnaire his only son who afterward at the pursuit principally of his own three sons by his first wife Lothaire Pepin and Lewis was deposed and put into a Monasterie But coming afterward to reign again his fourth son by his second wife named Charles le Chauve succeeded him against the right of succession due to his elder brother Lothaire Louys 2. to the prejudice of his elder brethren and his bastards to the prejudice of his lawful sons After Charles le Chauve came in Louis le Begue his third son the second beeing dead and the eldest for his evil demeanure put by his succession This Lewis left by his wife Adel trude daughter to King Alfred of England a little infant newly born and two bastard-sons of a Concubine Louys * and Carloman who for that the nobles of France said That they had need of a man to bee King and not a childe were to the prejudice of the lawful successor by the State chosen jointly for Kings and the whole Realm was divided between them And Q. Adeltrude with her childe fled into England Charles 4. to the prejudice of Louys 5. And Odo to the prejudice of Charles 4. Of these two Bastards Carloman left a son Louis le Faineant which succeded unto him But for his slothful life and vicious behaviour was deprived and made a Monk in the Abbey of St Denis where hee died And in his place was chosen for King of France Charles le * Gros Emperor of Rome who likewise afterward was for his evil government by them deposed and deprived not onely of the Kingdom but also of his Empire and was brought into such miserable penurie as divers write hee perished for want In his place was chosen Odo Earl of Paris and Duke of Angers of whom came Hugh Capet Charles the simple to the prejudice of Odo But beeing soon wearie of this man's government they deposed him as hee was absent in Gasconie and called Charles * named afterward the Simple out of England to Paris and restored him to the Kingdom of France leaving onely
Book of Knox of the Monstrous Government of Women 6. And John Leisley Bishop of Ross in Scotland confuteth the first point 1 That the Statute that beareth the inheritance of Aliens made 25 Edw. 3. is only to be understood of particular men's inheritance 2 There is express exception of the King's Children and Off-spring in the Statute 3 The Practice both before and since the Conquest to the contrary 7. The second If Henry 8. made such a Testament it could not hold in Law But that he made it not besides many probabilities the testimonies of the Lord Paget Sir Edw. Montague Lord Chief Justice and William Clark who set the King's stamp to the Writing avowed before the Council and Parlament in Queen Maries time That the testament was signed after the King was past sens and memory 8. Robert Heghington Secretary to the Earle of North writeth in favor of the King of Spain as next Heir to the House of Lancaster Another writeth in the behalf of the Dukes of Parma as next Heir of Portugal another for the Infanta of Spain as the Heir of Brittanie CAP. II. Of the Succession of the Crown from the Conquest unto Edward the Third's time The issue of VVilliam the Conquerer WILLIAM the Conqueror had four Sons and five Daughters Sons 1. Robert Duke of Normandie 2. Richard died in his youth 3. William Rufus 4. Henry the first Daughters 1. Sicilie a Nun 2. Constantia wife of Alain Fergant Duke of Britanie 3 Adela or Alice wife of Stephen Earle of Bloys c. The other two died yong Robert Duke of Normandie Robert of Normandie and his Son William were ruined by Henry 1. Robert pined away in the Castle of Cardiff William slain before Alost in Flanders whereof he was Earl by an arrow Henry 1. Of all the Children of Henry 1. Mande first married to Henry 5. Emperor had issue Henry 2. by Geoffrey Plantagenet Duke of Anjou c. her second Husband he Reigned after King Stephen The beginning of the House of Britanie Constantia the Conquerors second Daughter had issue Conan 2. le Gros who had issue Hoel and Bettha wife of Eudo Earle of Porrhet in Normandie her Father made her his Heir on his death bed disadvowing Howel she had issue Conan 3. He Constantia wife to Geoffrey third Son to Henry 2. by whom she had Arthur whom King John his Uncle put from the Crown of England and murthered After which Constantia married Guy Vicount of Touars a Britan and their issue have continued till this in the infanta of Spain and the Dutchess of Savoy her sister whose Mother was sister unto the last King of France Anna the Heir of Britanie had by Lewis the 12. of France one Daughter Claudia of whom and Francis the first came Henry 2. whose Daughter was Mother to the Infanta c. King Stephen Adela or Alice the Conquerors third Daughter had issue Stephen Earle of Bouloyne chosen King after Henry 1. before Mande his Daughter because a Woman and before her Son Henry 2. because he was but a Child and a degree further off from the Conqueros but especially by force and friends whereby he prevented also the Duke of Britain Son to his Mothers eldest sister He had two sons who left no issue and Mary wife to the Earle of Flanders whose right if any is discended to the Spaniard Henry 2. his Sons Henry 2. had issue by Eleonora the Heir of Aquitaine William who died yong Henry Crowned in his Fathers time and died without issue 3. Richard Coeur de Lyon who died without issue 4. Geoffrey who married Constance the Heir of Britain as aforesaid 5. John the King who had issue Henry the third Henry 2. his Daughters His Daughters were 1. Eleonora married to Alphonso 9. of Castile 2. to Alexis the Emperor 3. to the Duke of Saxonie 4. to the Earle of Tholouse Eleonora had Henry of Castile who died without issue and Blanche married to Lewis of France of the Race of Valois whose issue continueth and Berenguela married to the Prince of Leon whose Son Ferdinando by the death of his Uncle Henry without issue was chosen King of Castile before Saint Lewis the son of Blanche aforesaid because a stranger 16. The right which France had to Aquitain Poictiers and Normandie came to them by the aforesaid Blanche who was married thither on condition to have for her dower all that John had lost in France which was almost all hee had Henry 3. his Issue Henry 3. had Edward 1 hee Edw. 2. hee Edw. 3. and Edmund Crook-back Earl or Duke of Lancaster whose heir Lady Blanch married John of Gant the third son of Edw. 3. from whom came the hous of Lancaster Also Beatrix married to John 2. Duke of Britain from whom descended the Infantas Mother That Edward Crook-back was not elder then Edward 1. Edward Crook-back was not Edw. 1. elder brother and put by onely for his deformitie 2. hee was born 18 Junii 1245 and Edward 16 Junii 1239. Matth. West who lived at the same time 2. hee was a wise Prince and much imploied by his father and brother in their wars 3. his father advanced him in England and would have made him King of Naples and Sicilie 4. having the charge of the Realm at his father's death and his brother absent hee attempted no innovation nor hee nor any of his children made any claim to the Crown after that 5. If hee had been elder the title of Lancaster in John of Gant his Issue whose mother was heir unto Edmund had been without contradiction nor could the house of York have had any pretence of right The Issue of Edward Crook-back Henry the second Earl of Lancaster and grand-childe to the aforesaid Edmund was created Duke of Lancaster by Edward 3. Hee had but one childe the Ladie Blanch wife of John of Gant by whom hee became also Duke of Lancaster His three sisters were matched one to the Lord Maubery of whom the Howards of Norfolk Joane 2. Mary married to the Earl of Northumberland from whom the now-Earl 3. Eleonor married to the Earl of Arundel of whom the late Earle descended CAP. III. The Succession from Edward 3. The houses of Lancaster and York Edward 3. his Issue EDward the third had five sons 1. the Black Prince hee Richard second in whom his line ceased 2 Lionel Duke of Clarence 3. John of Gant Duke of Lancaster by his wife Blanche 4 Edward of Langley Duke of York 5. Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester The Title of the Hous of York Lionel of Clarence had one onely daughter and heir Philippe married to Edmund Mortimer Earl of March they Roger hee Anne Mortimer married to Richard Earl of Cambridg second son of Edmund L. of York His son Richard by the death of his Uncle slain at Agincourt came to bee Duke of York his father of Cambridg beeing executed for a Conspiracie against Henry 5. And was the first of the
or three S 7. yet 't is plain it was his own Will because he commanded it to be drawn written and sealed and never revoked it Besides it is subscribed by many witnesses and inrolled in the Chancery by his own command enough to make it good against the assertion of those few who to please the time wherein they spake in Queen Maries time might say and ghess the King was past memory when his stamp was put to it Now to make good what he did two Acts of Parlaments 28 35. of his Reign gave him full authoritie to dispose of this Point of Succession as he and his learned Council should think best for the Common-wealth By a Statute made in the 27th of Elisabeth 27. Elisah a Statute was made That whosoever shall be convinced to conspire attempt or procure the Queens death or is privie or accessary to the same shall loose all right title pretence claim or action that they or their heirs have or may have to the Crown of England Now the late Queen of Scots being attainted and executed by the authoritie of the said Parlament and for breach of the said Statute 't is easie to determine what Title her Son hath claiming only by her The Uniting of Scotland with England dangerous to the English or like to be 1. Only the increase of Subjects but those rather to participate the Commodities of England than to impart any from Scotland 2. The natural hatred of that People unto us and their ancient inclination to joyn with our enemies the French and Irish against us are Arguments of great mischiefs likely to ensue by that conjunction 3. The Scot must needs hold in jealousie so many Englishmen competitors of the Blood Royal and therefore will fortifie himself against them by those Forrein Nations of whom he is discended with whom he is allyed as the Scots French Danes and uncivil Irish which will prove intolerable to the English 4. The King both for his own safety and for the love he beareth to his own Nation will advance them and plant them about him in chief Places of credit which must needs breed Emulations and Controversies between them and the English Then must he of Force secretly begin to favor and fortifie his own to the incredible calamitie of the other as Canutus did his Danes and William the Conqueror his Normans neither of them enemies to the English blood nor evil Kings but careful of their own safeties for herein it is impossible to be neutral 5. The Romans with all their Power and Policie could never unite the hearts of England and Scotland in peace nor hold the Scots and North-Irish in obedience of any authority residing in England What then are we to hope for of this King herein The Religion of Scotland unpleasing to our State His Religion is neither fit for our State wherein Archbishops c. and Officers of Cathedral Churches are of much dignitie and there suppressed nor will be pleasing to our Nobilitie to be subject to the exorbitant and popular authoritie of a few ordinary Ministers which the King himself is there content to yield unto And therefore it is likely that few will be forward to entertain that King for the reforming of Religion here that hath no better Order in his own at home For the Ladie Arabella For the Ladie Arabella is alleged her being an equal degree of Discent with the King of Scots Her being above him in all hopes for herself or benefit to the English that can be expected in an English Prince and a Prince born in England Against Her Neither she nor the Scot are properly of the House of Lancaster and the Title of Lancaster is before the Pretence of York ut suprà 2. The testament of King Henry 8. barreth her as well as the Scot 3. Her Discent is not free from Bastardie for Queen Margaret soon after the death of her first Husband married Steward Lord of Annerdale who was alive long after her marriage with Anguis and it is most certain also That Anguis had another Wife alive when he married the said Queen All this confirmed by the Lord William Howard Father to the now Admiral sent into Scotland by Henry 8. of purpose to enquire thereof who reported it to King Henry Queen Mary and divers others For this cause King Henry would have letted the marriage between Anguis and his Sister and chiefly caused him to exclude her issue 4. She is a Woman and it were perhaps a great inconvenience that three of the weak sex should succeed one the other 5. All her Kindred by her Father is meer Scotish In England she hath none but by her Mother the Candishes a mean Familie and Kindred for a Princess CAP. VI Examination of the Title of the House of Suffolk being Darby and Hartford Sect. 29. 30. The Earle of Hartford's Children illegitimate THe Children of the Earle of Hartford Discending of Ladie Frances the eldest Daughter of Charles Brandon are proved illigitimate 1. Because the Ladie Katharine Gray their Mother was lawful Wife to the Earle of Pembroke when they were born not separated from him by lawful authority or for any just cause but abandoned by him because her House was come into misery and disgrace 2. It could never be lawfully proved that the said Earle and Ladie Katharine were married but only by their own Assertions not sufficient in Law Therefore was the marriage disannulled in the Arches by publick and definitive sentence of Parker Archbishop of Canterbury not long after the Birth of the said Children 3. When the Marquess of Dorset married their Grandmother the Ladie Frances he had another lawful Wife sister to H. Fitz-allen Earle of Arundel whom he put away to obtain so great a marriage as was the Lady Frances This bred much hate between the Marquess and Earle ever after but the Marquess favor with K. Henry deprived the other of all remedy And therefore may their Mother the Lady Katharine seem illegitimate too Bastardie in the issue of Charles Brandon Charles Brandon had a wife alive when he married the Queen of France by which wife he had issue the Ladie Powyse wife of the Lord Powyse and this wife of his lived some time after his marriage with the Queen Darby's Evasion This Wife say the Friends of Darby died before the birth of the Lady Eleonor the yonger daughter their ancestor though after the Birth of the Lady Francis Hartford's ancestor Hartford's Confutation of the first Bastardie To the first Bastardy of Hartford their Friends affirm That the Contract between the Lady Katharine and the Earl of Pembrook was dissolved lawfully and judicially in the time of Queen Mary Hartford's evasion of the second Bastardie in the behalf of his Second born Edward Seymore The Lady Katharine being found with Child affirmed the Earle of Hartford to be the Father Hereupon he being sent for out of France where he was with Sir N. Throgmorton and had got leave to
by her came to bee exstinct as it was in the children of H. 6. there is no reason but the issue of his daughters those that claim by Portugal Sect. 23 should succeed at least in the inheritance of that Duchie The Crown of England to John of Somerset son to John of Gant But for the right and title to the Crown of England which came by John of Gant himself third son of Edw. 3 and eldest that lived when hee died John Earl of Somerset though begotten out of matrimonie yet afterwards legitimated Sect. 25. his eldest son by Katharine Swinford was to inherit before the Ladie Philippe his sister by the Ladie Blanche The first reason of Portugal against Somerset Against which the favorites of Portugal allege divers reasons 1. Beeing born out of Wedlock and in Adulterie Sect. 25. and continuing a bastard many years hee could not bee made legitimate afterwards by Parlament to that effect of Succession to the Crown before Q. Philippe of Portugall and her children born before his legitimation who thereby had vim acquisitam as the Law saith which could not bee taken away by any posterior Act of Parlament without consent of the parties interessed Second Reason John King of Portugal married the Ladie Philippe with condition to enjoy all prerogatives that at day were due unto her which was six or seven years before his legitimation For Don Alonso and Don Edwardo the two sons of the said John and Philippe were born in the years 1390 and 1391. And John of Gant married Katharine Swinford and legitimated her children in the years 1396 1397. Third Reason The marriage of John of Gant with Katharine Swinford helpeth litle to better this legitimation which by the rules of the Common and Civil Laws is but a bare deposition for their children were Spurii begotten in plain Adulterie not in fornication onely and consequently the Privilege that the Law giveth to the subsequent mariage of the Parties by legitimating such children as are born in simple fornication where the parties are single cannot take place here nor can any legitimation equal much less prefer the legitimated before the lawful and legitimate by birth The Fourth Reason alleged by the Favorers of Portugal against the Issue of John of Somerset When Henry 6. and his son were extinguished and Edw. 4. usurped the Crown there remained of the Ladie Philippe Alfonse the Fift King of Portugal her Nephew of John of Somerset Margaret Countess of Richmond his Neece The Question is which of these two Competitors of the Hous of Lancaster and in equal degree from John of Gant and Henry 6. should have Succession by right immediately after the death of Henry 6. Alfonso say they for three Reasons First hee was a man and Margaret but a woman though shee came of the man and hee of the woman 2. Hee descended of the lawful and eldest daughter shee of the younger brother legitimated 3. Hee was of the whole blood to H. 6. and shee but of the half In which regard hee was to bee preferred at least in all the interests of Succession which were to bee had from Henry 4. onely and were never in his father John of Gant which were many as his right gotten by arms upon the evil government of the former King his Election by Parlament and Coronation by the Realm c. see for the rest Sect. 35. 43. Besides when King Richard 2. was dead hee was next in degree of propinquitie unto him of any man living as hath before been proved Sect. 36. CAP. IX The Genealogie and Controversies of Portugal 76. The Genealogie of Portugal Emanuel had by one wife six children 1. John 3. hee John that died in his father's time hee Sebastian slain by the Moors in Barbarie 2. Isabel Grandmother to the present King of Spain 3. Beatrix Grandmother to the Duke of Savoy 4. Lewis father of Don Antonio lately deceased in England 5. Henry Cardinal and after King 6. Edw. father of Mary Duchess of Parma who hath two sons Ranuntius Duke of Parma and Edward a Cardinal and father of Katharine Duchess of Bragança yet living whose Issue is Theodosius Duke of Bragança Edward Alexander and Philippe young Princes of great exspectation Five pretenders unto the Crown of Portugal Sebastian beeing dead Henry son of Emanuel succeeded who beeing old unmarried unlikely to have issue before him was debated the right of five Pretenders to the Succession of that Crown vid. Philippe of Spain Philibert Duke of Savoy the Duke of Parma his mother beeing then deceased Don Antonio and the Duchess of Bragança the three first by their Deputies the fourth Anthonio by himself and for himself the fift by her husband the Duke and his learned Council Of these the Duke of Savoy was soon excluded becaus his mother was younger sister to K. Philip's mother and himself younger then Philippe Don Antonio a Bastard and excluded Don Antonio was also rejected and pronounced a bastard by the said King Henry for many reasons 1. Hee was taken to bee so all his father's life time and that without question 2. Certain Decrees coming out from Rome in the time of Julius 3. against the promotion of bastards hee sued to the said Pope to bee dispensed withall 3 His father Don Lewis hath oftentimes testified by word and writing that hee was his Bastard and signified asmuch in his last will 4. It is likely that if Lewis had married his mother who was base in birth and of the Jewish as som stories affirm hee would have made som of his friends and kindred acquainted therewith as a matter so much important to them to know which hee never did though the King avowed himself was present with him at his death 5. If hee had been legitimate why did hee not pretend the Succession before the said King next after the death of Sebastian beeing son to his elder brother as well as was Sebastian 6. Whereas hee had produced witnesses vid. his mother sister with her husband and two others to prove that his father before his death had married with his mother in secret the said K. Cardinal affirmed that upon their examination hee had found they were suborned by Anthonio becaus they agreed not in their reports and becaus som of them confessed they were suborned whereupon hee hath caused them to be punished If not why not Duke of Lanc. Seeing that in England wee hold the said Don Anthonio for true King of Portugal I see not how wee can deny his children their right at least to the Duchie of Lancaster whereof whosoëver is right heir of Portugal should bee rightest heir Sect. 70. Allegations to prove the Duke of Parm's right That hee represented his mother and shee her father Lo. Edward who had hee been alive had carried it from his elder sister Elisa K. Philip's 2. mother consequently his issue to bee preferred before hers 2. Against the Duchess of Bragança that his mother was the elder sister therefore
either for Valor Prowess length of Reign acts of Chivalrie or the multitude of famous Princes his Children left behind him was one of the noblest Kings that ever England had RICHARD 2d Richard the 2d Son to the black Prince of Wales for having suffered himself to be misled by evil Counsellers to the great hurt and disquietness of the Realm was deposed also after 22. years reign by a Parliament holden at London the year 1399. and condemned to perpetual Prison in the Castle of Pomfret where he was soon after put to death and in his place was by free Election chosen the noble Knight Henry * Duke of Lancaster who proved afterwards so notable a King as the world knoweth HENRY 6th Henry 6th after almost 40. years reign was deposed imprisoned and put to death also together with his Son the Prince of Wales by Edward 4th of the House of York And this was confirmed by the * Commons and afterwards also by publick Act of Parliament because the said Henry did suffer himself to be over-ruled by the Queen his Wife and had broken the Articles of Agreement made by the Parlament between him and the Duke of York and solemnly sworn on both sides the 8th of Octob. 1459. though otherwise for his particular life he were a good man and King Edward 4th was put in place who was one of the renownedest for Martial Acts and Justice that hath worn the English Crown RICHARD 3d. This man having left two Sons his Brother Richard Duke of Glocester put them to death and being the next Heir Male was authorised in the Crown but Deposed again afterwards by the Common-wealth which called out of France Henry Earle of Richmond who took from him both life and Kingdom in the Field and was King himself by the name of Henry 7. And no man I suppose will say but that he was lawfully King also which yet cannot be except the other might lawfully be deposed If the said Deprivations were unjust the now Pretences are unlawful Moreover is to be noted in all these Mutations what good hath succeeded therein to the Common-wealth which was unjust and is void at this day if the Changes and Deprivations of the former Princes could not be made and consequently none of these that do pretend the Crown of England at this day can have any Title at all for that from those men they discend who were put in place of the deprived If Kings established may be Deprived much sooner Pretenders And if this might be so in Kings lawfully set in Possession then much more hath the said Common-wealth power and authoritie to alter the succession of such as do pretend Dignitie if there be due reason and causes to the same Wherein consisteth principally the lawfulness of Proceedings against Princes which in the former Chapter is mentioned What interest Princes have in their Subjects Goods or Lives How Oaths do Binde or may be Broken by Subjests towards Princes And finally the difference between a good King and a Tyrant CAP. IV. 1. Objection against the Assertions in the last Chapter BUt although by Nature the Common-wealth hath authoritie over the Prince to chuse and appoint him at the beginning yet having once made him and given up all their authoritie unto him he is no more subject to their correction but remaineth absolute of himself As every particular man hath authorised to make his Master or Prince of his inferior but not afterwards to put him down again howsoever he beareth himself towards him 2. Objection When the Children of Israël being under the Government of the High Priest demanded a King of Samuel he protesting unto them Well quoth he you will have a King hearken then to this that I will say Hoc erit jus Regis qui imperaturus est vobis He shall take away from you your Children both Sons and Daughters your Fields and Vineyards c. and shall give them to his servants and you shall cry unto God in that day from the face of this your King and God shall not hear you for that you have demanded a King to Govern over you Assertions of Bellay Yea Bellay and some other that wrote in flatterie of Princes in these our days do not only affirm That Princes are lawless and subject to no accompt or correction whatsoever they do But also That all goods chattels possessions and whatsoever else commodities temporal of the Common wealth are properly the Kings and that their Subjects have only the use thereof so as when the King will he may take it from them by right Answer to Bellay his First Assertion But for the first That Kings are subject to no Law Is against the very Institution of a Common-wealth which is to live together in Justice and Order for if it holdeth so insteed of Kings and Governors to defend us we may set up publick murtherers ravishers theeves and spoylers to devour us Then were all those Kings before mentioned both of the Jewes Gentiles and Christians unlawfully deprived and their Successors unlawfully put up in their places and consequentlie all Princes living at this day are intruders and no lawful Princes Answer to Bellay his Second Assertion Of the second saying also That all temporalities are properly the Princes and that Subjects have only the use thereof no less absurdities do follow First it is against the very first principle and foundation of the Civil Law which at the first entrance maketh this division of Goods That some are common by Nature to all men as the Aër the Sea c. Others are publick to all of one Citie or Countrie but yet not common to all in general as Rivers Ports c. Some are of the Communitie of a Citie or Common-wealth but yet not common to every particular person of that Citie as common Rents Theaters the publick hous and the like Some are of none nor properly of any man's Goods as Churches and Sacred things And some are proper to particular men as those which every man possesseth of his own Besides it overthroweth the whole nature of a Common-wealth maketh all Subject to be but very slaves for that slaves and bondmen in this do differ from freemen that slaves have only the use of things without property or interest and cannot acquire or get to themselves any dominion or true right in any thing but it accreweth all to their Master Lastly If all Goods be properly the King's why was Achab and Jezabel so reprehended and punished by God for taking away Naboth's vineyard Why do the Kings of England France and Spain ask Money of their Subjects in Parlament and that termed by the names of Subsidies Helps Benevolences Loans Prests Contributions c How have the Parlament oftentimes denied them the same Why are there Judges appointed for matter of Suits and Pleas between the Prince and the People Why doth the Canon Law inhibit all
this Reign drew all England into factions and divisions the States in a Parlament at Wallingford made an agreement that Stephen should bee lawful during his life onely and that Henry and his off spring should succeed him and Prince William King Stephen's son was deprived and made onely Earl of Norfolke King John to the prejudice of his Nephew Arthur This Henry 2 left Richard Jeffrey and John Richard sirnamed Coeur de Lyon succeeded him and dying without issue * John was admitted by the States and Arthur Duke of Britaine son and heir to Jeffrey * excluded who coming afterward to get the Crown by war was taken by his Uncle John who murthered him in prison Louys Prince of France to the prejudice of King John and King John's son afterward to the prejudice again of Louys But som years after the Barons and States of England misliking the government of this King John rejected him again and chose Louys the Prince of France to bee their King and did swear fealtie to him in London depriving also the young Prince Henry John's son of 8 years old but upon the death of King John that ensued shortly after they recalled again that sentence disannulled the Oath and Allegiance made unto Louys Prince of France and admitted this Henry * to the Crown who reigned 53 years The Princes of York and Lancaster had their best Titles of the autoritie of the Common-wealth From this Henry 3. take their first begining the two branches of York and Lancaster In whose contentions the best of their titles did depend upon the autoritie of the Common-wealth For as the people were affected and the greatest part prevailed so were they confirmed or disannulled by Parlament And wee may not well affirm but that when they are in possession and confirmed therein by these Parlaments they are lawful Kings and that God concurreth with them For if wee should deny this point wee should shake the states of most Princes in the world at this day The Common-wealth may dispose of the Crown for her own good And so to conclude As propinquitie of blood is a great preheminencie towards the atteining of the Crown so doth it not ever binde the Common-wealth to yield thereunto and to shut up her eies or admit at hap-hazard or of necessitie any one that is next by succession but rather to take such an one as may perform the dutie and charge committed For that otherwise to admit him that is an enemie or unfit is but to destroy the Common-wealth and him together What are the principal points which a Common-wealth ought to respect in admitting or excluding of any Prince that pretendeth to succeed wherein is handled largely also of the diversitie of Religions and other such causes CAP. IX Seeing the Common-wealth is to know and judg of the matter no doubt but God doth allow of her judgment HEe who is to judg and give the sentence in the things is also to judg of the caus for thereof is hee called Judg So if the Common-wealth hath power to admit or put back the Prince or pretender to the Crown shee hath also autoritie to judg of the lawfulness of the causes considering specially that it is in their own affair and and in a matter that depend's wholly upon them for that no man is King or Prince by institution of Nature but only by authoritie of the Common-wealth Who can then affirm the contrary but that God doth allow for a just and sufficient cause in this behalf the only Will and Judgment of the Weal-publick it self supposing alwaies that a whole Realm will never agree by orderly way of Judgement to exclude the next Heir in Blood without a reasonable Cause in the sight and censure The Pope is to obey the Determination of the Common-wealth without further inquisition except it be in Cases of injustice and Tyranny And seeing that they only are the Judges of this Case and are properly Lords and Owners of the whole business we are to presume that what they Determine is just and lawful though at one time they should Determine one thing and the contrary at another as they did often in England being led at different times by different motions and it is enough for every particular man to subject himself and obey simply their Determination without further inquisition except he should see that Open Injustice were done therein or God manifestly offended and the Realm endangered Open Injustice if not the true Common-wealth but some Faction of wicked men should offer to Determine the matter without lawful authoritie God offended and the Realm endangered where it is evident that he that is preferred will do what lieth in him to the prejudice both of God's glory and of the Common-wealth as if a Turke or some notorious wicked man and Tyrant should be offred to Govern among Christians Whence the Reasons of Admitting or Receiving a Prince are to be taken Now to know the true Causes and principal Points which ought to be chiefly regarded as well by the Common-wealth as by every particular man in the furthering or hindering any Prince we must return to the End wherefore Government was appointed which is to defend preserve and benefit the Common-wealth because from this Consideration are to be deduced all other Considerations for discerning a good or evil Prince For that whosoever is most likely to defend c. his Realm and Subjects he is most to be allowed and desired as most conform to the end for which Government was ordained And on the contrary side he that is least like to do this deserveth least to be preferred And this is the Consideration that divers Common-wealths had in putting back oftentimes Children and impotent People though next in blood from succession Three Chief Points to be regarded in every Prince And here shall be fitly remembred what Gerard recounteth of the King of France that in his Coronation he is new apparrelled three times in one day once as a Priest and then as a Judge and last as a King armed thereby to signifie three things committed to his charge first Religion then Justice then Manhood and Chivalrie which division seemeth very good and fit and to comprehend all that a Weal-Publick hath need of for her happie State and Felicity both in soul and bodie and for her end both supernatural and natural And therefore these seem to be the three Points which most are to be regarded in every Prince Why it is here principally treated of Religion For the latter two because they have been often had in Consideration in the Changes aforesaid and Religion whereof then scarce ever any question or doubt did fall in these actions rarely or never And because in these our dayes it is the principal Difference and chiefest Difficultie of all other and that also it is of it self the first and highest and most necessarie Point to be considered in the Admission of a Prince therefore it
hous of York that challenged the Crown and died in the quarrel His son was Edward the 4. The Issue of the Duke of Glocester Thomas of Woodstock had onely one childe Anne married to the Lord Stafford whose issue came after in regard of this marriage for Thomas was Earl of Buckingham too to bee Duke of Buckingham som of whose blood are yet in England The Issue of John of Gant by his first Wife John of Gant had three Wives 1 Blanch the heir of Lancaster aforesaid by whom hee had Henry 4. and Philippe married to John King of Portingal from whom are lineally descended such as at this day claim interest in that Crown and Elisabeth married to John Holland Duk of Exceter whose grand-childe Henry left onely Anne married to Sir Thomas Nevil Knight from whom the Earl of Westmerland is lineally descended By his second Wife By his second Ladie Constance daughter of Peter King of Castile hee had onely one daughter Katharine married to Henry the third King of Castile of whom the King of Spain that now is is lineally desended By his third Wife Henry 7. his Title His third Katharine Swinford daughter to a Knight of Henault and attending on his wife Blanch hee used as his Concubine in his wife Constance's time and begat of her three sons and one daughter and after married her to Swinford an English Knight who dead and his wife Constance also hee married her Anno 1396 and caused his said children by her to bee legitimated by Parlament Anno 1397. Henry 7. his Title from Lancaster His sons were 1. John Duke of Somerset 2. Thomas Duke of Excester 3. Henry Bishop and Cardinal of Winchester His daughter Jane married to the Earl of Westmerland The Issues of all these were soon spent except of John of Somerset who had two sons John and Edmund John one onely daughter Margaret married to Edmund Tidder Earl of Richmond by whom hee had Henry 7. Edmund and his three sons all died in the quarrel of the Hous of Lancaster without Issue The line of Clarence and Title of the Earl of Huntington George Duke of Clarence second brother of Edw. 4. had Issue Edw. Earl of Warwick put to death by Henry 7. and Margaret Countess of Salisbury married to Sir Richard Poole of Wales by whom hee had Henry Arthur Geoffroy and Reynald after Cardinal Henry Lo. of Montague put to death with his mother by H. 8. had Katharine married to the Earl of Huntington they the now Earl c. and Wenefred married to Sir Tho. Barrington Arthur Marie married to Sir John Stanny and Margaret to Sir Tho. Fitzherbert Geoffrey Geoffrey Poole hee Arthur and Geoffrey which yet live in Italie Henry 7. his Issue The Title of Scotland and of the Ladie Arbella Henry 7. had by the eldest daughter of Edw. 4. for of all the other three remaineth no issue besides Hen. 8. Margaret first married to the K. of Scots they James 5. who Mary mother to the now King After married to the Earl of Anguis they Margaret married to the Earl of Lenox they Henry married to the last Queen and murthered 1566. and Charles married to Elisa Ca4dish by whom the Ladie Arbella The Title of the Lord Beacham and his brother Marie the second daughter first married to Lewis 12. of France without issue then to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk they Francis married to Henry Gray Marquis Dorset after Duke of Suffolk beheaded by Q. Mary they Jane married to Dudley both beheaded Katharine first married to the Earl of Pembroke and left by him to the Earl of Hartfort as themselves affirmed in the Tower from whom descendeth the Lord Beacham and Edward Seymer his brother The Title of the Hous of Derbie Eleonor second daughter to Ch. Brandon and the Queen of France was married to Henry Clifford Earl of Cumberland they had issue Margaret married to Henry Earl of Derbie who had issue the last and the now Earl CAP. IV. The Controversie between the Houses of Lancaster and York The Pretence of the Hous of York BY Richard Duke of York son of Richard Earl of Cambridg aforesaid c. That considering hee had by descent joined in him the right aswell of Lionel Duke of Clarence second son to Edw. 3. as of Edward Duke of York the fourth son of Edw. 3. hee was to bee preferred before the Hous of Lancaster claiming onely from John of Gant the third son of Edward 3. Richard 2. Deposed Edward 3. in his old age for the love hee bare to the black Prince confirmed the Succession by Parlament to Richard 2. his son and caused the rest of his sons to swear thereunto Richard 2. for his misgovernment was deposed by common consent and Henry 4. chosen in his place which himself and his issue possessed about 60 years The question is Whether King Richard were rightfully deposed or no That a King may bee deposed on just causes First that a King on just causes may bee deposed is proved by Reason becaus the rule beeing given by the Common-wealth on condition of just government that much violated the condition is broken and the same Common-wealth may take the forfeiture This proved by the autoritie of all Law-makers Philosophers Divines and Governors of Common-wealths and by example of divers Depositions which God himself hath blessed with good success Proved by reasons and examples of Divinitie An ill Prince is an armed enemie with his feet set on the Realm's head whence hee cannot bee plucked but by force of Arms Object God may cut him off by sickness or otherwise and therefore wee are to attend his good pleasure Answ. God alwaies bindeth not himself to work miracles nor often with extraordinary means but hath left upon earth unto men and Common-wealths power to do justice in his Name upon offendors Examples hereof are Ehud stirr'd up by God to kill Eglon King of the Moabites by a stratageme Judg. 3. and the Philistins to kill David to persecute Saul Jeroboam to rebell against Roboam the son of Solomon 2 Reg. 11. 12. Jehu to depose Joram and Q. Jezabel his mother 4. Reg. 9. The Captains of Jerusalem at the persuasion of Jehoiada the high-Priest to conjure against Q. Athalia whom they deposed and Joash chosen in her room 4. Reg. 11. All which hee might have removed without blood-shed if hee would But hee appointed men to work his Will by these violent means to deliver that Common-wealth from oppression and for the greater terror of all bad Princes Allegations of the Lancastrians that King Richard 2. was justly Deposed Just causes of Deposing Richard 2. were Hee murthered his Uncle the Duke of Glocester without form of Law or process Hee put to death the Earl of Arundel banished Warwick Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury and Henry Duke of Hereford and Lancaster and after King whose goods and inheritance descending to the said Henry from his Father hee wrongfully seized on Hee suffered the Earl of Oxford
Kings is in substance the same as that of the Emperor for the Archbishop of Guesna Metropolitan of all Polonia declareth to the King before the high Altar the End and Condition of his Office and Dignitie unto what Points he must Swear and what do signifie the Sword the Ring the Scepter and the Crown And the King's Oath thereupon being taken the Marshal General of the whole Kingdom doth ask with a loud voice of all the Nobilitie and People there present Whether they be content to submit themselves unto this King or no Who answering Yea the Archbishop doth end the residue of the Ceremonies and doth place him in the Royal Throne where all his Subjects do Homage unto him The manner used in Spain before the entring of the Moors Sisinandus When Spain remained yet one General Monarchie under the Gothes before the entring of the Moors Sissinandus who had expelled King Suintila for his cruel Government in the Fourth National Council of Toledo holden the year 633. prayed with submission the Prelats there gathered together to determine that which should be needful for the maintaining both of Religion and State and so after matters of Religion they first confirm the Deposition of King Suintila together with his Wife Brother and Children and then authorise the Title of Sissinandus but yet with this insinuation We do require you that are our present King and all other our Princes that shall follow hereafter with the humilitie which is meek and moderate towards your Subjects and that you Govern your People in Justice and Pietie and that none of you do give sentence alone against any man in case of Life and Death but with the consent of your publick Council and with those that be Governors in matters of Judgment And against all Kings that are to come we do promulgate this sentence That if any of them shall against the reverence of our Laws exercise cruel Authoritie with proud domination and Kinglie pomp following only their own concupisence in wickedness that they are condemned by Christ with the sentence of Excommunication and have their separation both from him and us to everlasting judgment Chintilla Sissinandus being dead one Chintilla was made King in his place under whom were gathered two other Councils the 5th and 6th of Toledo in which matters were determined about the Succession to the Crown Safetie of the Prince Provision for his Children Friends Officers and Favorites after his death against such as without the approbation of the Common-wealth did aspire to the same And among other Points a severe Decree was made in the 6th Council concerning the King's Oath at his admission That he should not be placed in the Royal seat until among other Conditions he had promised by the Sacrament of an Oath That he would suffer no man to break the Catholick Faith c. After the entring of the Moors Don Pelago After the coming in of the Moors one Don Pelago a yong Prince of the Royal Blood of the Gothes being fled among the rest to the Mountains was found and made King and having began the recovery of Spain by the getting of Leön left a certain Law written in the Gotish tongue touching the manner of making their King in Spain and how he must Swear to their Liberties and Priviledges whereof the first Article saith Before all things it is established for a Law Libertie and Priviledge of Spain That the King is to be placed by Voices and Consent perpetually and this to the intent no evil King may enter without consent of the People seeing they are to give to him that which with their blood and labors they have gained of the Moors For the fashion of making their Kings in that old time it remaineth still in substance at this day but the manner thereof is somwhat altered for now the Spanish Kings be not Crowned but have another Ceremonie for their admission equal to Coronation which is performed by the Archbishop of Toledo Primate of all Spain Manner used in France Two Manners thereof In France have been two manners used of that Action the one more antient hath endured 600. years from Clodoveus that was Christned and Anointed also and Crowned at Rheims by S. Remigius unto the time of Henry 1. and Philip 1. his Son before the 12. Peers of France were appointed to assist the Coronation which now is the chiefest part of that Solemnitie In the old fashion as saith du Haillan the Kings were lifted up and carried about upon a Target by the chief Subjects there present according to the manner of the Spaniards But for the substance of the admission it was not much different from that which is now The Old Manner Philip 1. For example the Coronation of Philip 1. Henry 1. his father desiring for his old age to establish him in the Crown before his death did ask the consent and approbation both generally and in particular of the Nobility and People for his admission Whom finding all willing he brought him to Rheims where in the great Church the Mass being began upon the reading of the Epistle the Archbishop turning about the Prince declared unto him what was the Catholick Faith and asked him Whether he did beleeve it and would defend it against all persons who affirming that he would his Oath was brought unto him whereunto he must Swear which he took and holding his hands between the hands of the Archbishop read it with a loud voice and signed it with his own hand The substance of the Oath was That he would preserve unto the Clergie all Canonical priviledges and all Law and Justice unto them as every King was bound to do and furthermore administer Justice unto all People given him in charge Then the Archbishop taking his Cross after he had shewed unto all the audience the authoritie that the Archbishop of Rheims had to anoint and Crown the King of France and asked license of King Henry the Father Il esleut Philippe son fili pour en Roy de France Which the Popes Legats and the Nobility and People did approve crying out three times Nous l'approvvons nous le voalons soit fait nôtre Roy Institution of the newest Manner This Manner was altered specially by * Louysle Jeune who leaving still the substance of the action added thereunto divers external Ceremonies of Honor and Majestie and amongst other ordeined the offices of Twelve Peers of France Six Ecclesiastical and Six Temporal who ever since have had the chiefest Places and Offices in this great action First THe Archbishop and Duke of Rheims anointeth and Crowneth the King The Bishop and Duke of Laon beareth the Glass of Sacred Oyl The Bishop and Duke of Langres the Cross The Bishop and Earle of Beauvais the Mantle Royal. The Bishop and Earle of Koyon the King's Girdle The Bishop and Earle of Chaalons the Ring The Duke of Burgundie Dean of
both Polydore and Stow do affirm never to have been offered before to any Prince of England Admission is of more importance and hath prevailed against Right of succession Whence it is gathered That the Title of Succession without the Admission of the Common-wealth cannot make a lawful King and that of the two the second is of far more importance which may be proved by many examples As of William Rufus that Succeeded the Conqueror King Henry the first his Brother King Stephen's King John's and others who by only Admission of the Realm were Kings against the Order of Succession Henry and Edward the 4th did found the best part and most surest of their Titles and the defence thereof upon the Election Consent and good will of the People And for this cause the most Politick Princes that had any least suspicion of Troubles about the Title after their deaths have caused their Sons to be Crowned in their own days As Hugh Capetus Robert his eldest Son and Robert Henry the first his second Son excluding his elder Henry also procured the same to Philip the first his eldest Son And Louys le Gros unto two Sons of his first to Philip and after his death to Louys the yonger And this Louys again unto Philip 2. his Son The Prince of Spain is Sworn alwaies and admitted by the Realm during his Father's Reign The same Consideration also moved King David to Crown his Son Solomon in his own days And in England King Henry 2. considering the alteration that the Realm had made in admitting King Stephen before him against the Order of Lineal Succession and fearing that the like might happen also after him caused his eldest Son Henry the third to be Crowned in his life time So as England had two Kings Henry's living at one time with equal Authoritie How the next in succession by Propinquitie of Blood hath oftentimes been put back by the Common-wealth and others further off admitted in their Places even in these Kingdoms where Succession prevaileth with many Examples of the Kingdoms of Israël and Spain CAP. VII Examples of the Jews SAUL David Elected to the prejudice of Saul's Sons ALbeit God made Saul a true and lawful King over the Jews and consequently also gave him all Kinglie Prerogatives whereof one Principle is To have his Children succeed after him in the Crown yet he suffered not any of his Generation to succeed him but elected David who was a stranger by birth and no kinn at all to the deceased King Rejecting thereby from the Crown not only Isboseth Saul's elder Son though followed for a time by Abner Capt. General of that Nation with eleven Tribes but also Jonathan his other Son who was so good a man and so much praised in holy Scripture Whereby it is evident that the fault of the Father may prejudicate the Son's Right to the Crown albeit the Son have no part in the fault DAVID Solomon to the prejudice of Adonias and his Brethren David being placed in the Crown by Election free Consent and Admission of the People of Israël though by motion and direction of God himself no man will deny but that he had given him all Kinglie Priviledges and Regalities as among other the Scripture testifieth that it was assured him by God That his Seed should Reign after him yea and that for ever Yet this was not performed to any of his elder Sons but only to Solomon his yonger and tenth Son who by the means and perswasions of Queen Bersabé his Mother and Nathan the Prophet was chosen and made King by his Father to the prejudice of his elder Adonias and the rest of his Brethren * Whereby we are taught that these and like determinations of the People Magistrates and Common-wealths when their designments are to good ends and for just respects and causes are allowed also by God and oftentimes are his own special drifts and dispensations though they seem to come from man Jeroboam to the prejudice of Roboam Solomon's Son and Heir After Solomon's death Rehoboam his Son and Heir coming to Sichem where all the people of Israël were gathered for his Admission and having refused to yield to certain Conditions for taking away of some hard and heavie Impositions laid upon them by Solomon his Father which the People had proposed unto him ten Tribes of the twelve refused to admit him for their King but chose one Jeroboam his Servant a meer stranger and of poor Parentage and God allowed thereof for the Sins of Solomon leaving Rehoboam over two Tribes and Jeroboam over ten God's dealing in his Common-wealth a president for all others Although we may say that in the Jewish Common-wealth God almightie did deal and dispose of things against the ordinary course of man's Law as best liked himself whose Will is more than Law and is to be limitted by no Rule or Law of man and therefore that these Examples are not properly the act of a Common-wealth as our Question demandeth yet are they well brought in because they may give light to all the rest For if God permitted and allowed this in his own Common-wealth that was to be the Example and Pattern of all others no doubt but he approveth also the same in other Realms when just occasions are offered either for his service the good of the People and Realm or else for punishment of the sins and wickedness of some Princes Examples of SPAIN Four Races of Spanish Kings Spain since the expulsion of the Romans hath had Three or Four Races of Kings The first is from the Gothes which began to reign about the year 416 and endured by the space of 300. years until Spain was lost to the Moors And to them the Spaniard referreth all his old Nobility The second from Don Pelago who after the Invasion of the Moors was chosen King of Austurias about the year 717. and his Race continued adding Kingdom to Kingdom for the space of 300. years until the year 1034. The third from Don Sancho Mayor King of Navarra who having gotten into his Power the Earldoms of Arragon and Castilia made them Kingdoms and divided them among his Children And Don Fernando his second Son King of Castilia sirnamed afterward the Great by marrying of the Sister of Don Dermudo King of Leon and Asturias joyned all those Kingdoms together and this Race endured for 500. years until the year 1549 When for the Fourth the House of Austria came in by Marriage of the Daughter and Heir of Don Ferdinando sirnamed the Catholick which endureth until this day The First Race For the First Race because it had express Election joyned with Succession as by the Councils of Toledo it appeareth it can yield no valuable examples for this place The Second Race Don Alonso to the prejudice of Don Favila his Children In the Second Though the Law of Succession by Propinquitie
bastard-brother to the prejudice of his his lawful Edmond and Aldred This Egbert left a son named Elthelwolfe or Adelwulfe or Edolf who succeeded him and had four sons Ethelbald Ethelbert Ethelred and Alfred who were all Kings one after another and for the most part most excellent Princes specially Alfred the last of all whose acts bee wonderful Hee left a son as famous as himself which was Edward the elder who dying left two lawful sons Edmond and Aldred and one illegitimate named Adelstan which being esteemed to bee of more valor then the other two was preferred to the Crown before them and was a Prince of worthie memorie Hee brought England into one perfit Monarchie having expelled utterly the Danes and quieted the Welchmen Conquered Scotland and brought their K. Constantine to do him homage Restored also Luys d'Outremer his nephew to the kingdom of France Aldred to the prejudice of his Nephews Edwin and Edgar This Adelstan dying without issue his lawful brother Edmond was admitted who left two sons Edwin and Edgar but for that they were yong they were put back and their Uncle Aldred preferred who reigned with the good will and prais of all men Edgar to the prejudice of his elder brother Edwin Aldred dying without issue his elder Nephew Edwin was admitted to the Crown but yet four years after hee was deposed again for his leud and vitious life and his younger brother Edgar admitted in his place who was one of the rarest Princes that the world had in his time Stow saith hee kept 3600 ships in this Realm Canutus Dane to the prejudice of Edmond and Edward Englishmen This Edgar had by his first Wife Egilfred Edward called the Martyr and by his second Alfred Etheldred Which Alfred to the end that her Son might Reign caused Edward to be slain and so Etheldred came to the Crown though with much contradiction moved in hatred specially of the murther of his Brother This Etheldred was driven out of this Kingdom by Sweno King of the Danes who possessed the Realm and dying left a Son Canutus with whom Etheldred returning after the death of Sweno made an Agreement and Division of the Realm And so died leaving his eldest * Son Edmund Iron-side to succeed him who soon after dying also left two Sons Edmund and Edward but the whole Realm to Canutus who pretended it to be his by a Covenant made between Iron-side and him That the longest liver should have all and so with the Realm took the two Children and sent them over into Swethland And was admitted not only by the consent of the Realm but allowed also by the Sea of Rome And he lived and proved an excellent good King and after twenty years Reign died much mourned by the Englishmen Harald Bastard preferred to his lawful Brother Hardicanutus This Canutus left a base Son named Harald and a lawful one named Hardicanutus But Harald was by the more part of Voices chosen before his lawful Brother Hardicanutus preferred before his neerer in Blood After the death of Harald Hardicarnutus was chosen without any respect either to Edward the Confessor Alured Sons to Etheldred that were in Normandy or to Edmond and Edward Sons to his Son Iron-side that were in Sweathland though in proximitie of Blood they were before him Alured and Edward the Confessor before Edmond and Edward their eldest Brother's Sons But this Hardicanutus dying without issue Alured second son to Etheldred by his second Wife against the priority both of his Brother and his Nephews that were in Swethland was called to be King but being murthered by the way by Goodwin the Earl of Kent his elder brother Edward the Confessor was admitted yet before Edmond and Edward sons to his elder brother Iron-side And the said Edward the Confessor was a most excellent Prince and Reigned in Peace almost twenty years Harald 2. to the prejudice of Edgar Edward being dead without issue The States made a great Consultation whom they should make King and first of all excluded him that was only next by Propinquitie of blood which was Edgar eldest son to Edward the Out-law son to Edmond Iron-side because he was a Child not able to Govern the Realm And Harald son to the Earle Goodwin by the Daughter of Canutus was admitted William Duke of Normandie his Title by Election But William Duke of Normandie pretended to be chosen before by * Edward the Confessor with the consent of the Realm which though no English Authors do avow it cleerly seemeth notwithstanding very probable Because the said William had at his Entrance many in England that did favor his pretence and that as Gerard saith At his coming to London he punished divers by name for that they had broken their Oaths and Promises in that behalf Moreover by alleging his Title of Election he moved divers Princes abroad to favor him in that action as in a just quarrel which it is not like they should have done if he had pretended only a Conquest or his Title of Consanguinity which could be of no importance in the world Among others Pope Alexander 2. whose Holiness was greatly esteemed in those dayes did send him his Benediction and a precious Ring of Gold with a Hallowed Banner St. Anthoninus Archbishop of Florence commended his enterprise But howsoever he got the Victory and God prospered his Pretence and hath confirmed his off-spring in the Crown more than these Five hundred years Examples after the Conquest William Rufus and Henry 1. to the prejudice of their elder brother Robert William the Conqueror left three sons Robert William and Henry and by his Will the Kingdom to William named Rufus forsom particular displeasure against his elder son who being at his fathers death absent in the war of Jerusalem was put back although the most part of the Realm was inclined unto him and William Rufus by the persuasion of Lanfrake Archbishop of Canterbury was established in the Crown And hee dying without issue his younger brother Henry against the right also of his elder brother Robert absent again in the war of Jerusalem did by fair promises to the people and the help of Henry Newborow Earl of Warwick and Maurice Bishop of London get the Crown wherein God did so prosper him that his said brother Robert coming afterwards to depose him of it hee took him prisoner and kept the Crown King Stephen preferred to Henry 2. his nearer in blood and Henry again to Stephen his issue This King Henry left a daughter which had of Jeffrey Plantagenet Duke of Anera a son named Henry whom Henry his Grandfather caused to bee declared Heir apparent in his daies But yet after his deceas becaus Prince Henry was but a childe the State of England did choos Stephen Earl of Boulongue and son to Adela the Conqueror's daughter putting back both Henry and his Mother But again for that
his minion to put away his wife a goodly young Ladie daughter of Isabell his father's sister and to marrie another openly to her disgrace And in the last evil Parlament hee made would needs have all absolute autoritie granted to 6 or 7 his favorites to determine of all matters Grieved with these exorbitant indignities the more or better part of the Realm called home by their Letters Henry 4. deposed Richard 2. by Act of Parlament by his own confession of unworthie Government and his voluntarie resignation of the Crown to the said Henry by publick instrument All this without blood-shed And in almost all this Edmund L. D. of York the head of that familie together with Edward Duke of Aumale his eldest son and Richard Earle of Cambridge his yonger the Grand-father of Edward 4. assisted the said Henry That Henry 4. had more right to Succeed unto Richard 2. than Edmond Mortimer heir of Clarence much more any other King Richard 2. deposed the question is Whether Edmond Mortimer then alive his Father Roger being slain in Ireland a little before Nephew removed of Lionel Duke of Clarence or Henry Duke of Lancaster son of John of Gant should have Succeeded in right For Henry is alleged his being neerer to the former King by two degrees and proximitie of Blood though not of the elder Line is to be or hath been preferred in these cases 2. His Title came by a Man the others by a Woman not so much favored by Law nor Reason 3. The said Edmond being offered the Crown by Richard Earle of Cambridge who had married his Sister Anne and other Noblemen at Southampton he judged it against equitie discovered the Treason to Henry the fifth by whose command those Noblemen were executed 1415. Thirty years after which Richard Duke of York son of the aforesaid Earle and Anne for Edmond her brother died without issue set his Title on foot And whereas Roger Mortimer Father of this Edmond was declared Heir apparent by a Parlament 1382 that was done by Richard 2. from the hatred he bore to John of Gant and his son Henry rather than for the goodness of the others Title the cause whereof was Because immediately after the death of the Black Prince divers learned and wise men held opinion That John of Gant eldest son of Edward 3. then living should rather succeed than Richard jure Propinquitatis This made the old King Edward 3. confirm the Succession to Richard 2. by Parlament and the Oaths of his Uncles and made the yong King Richard 2. hold first and his son in jealousie and hatred ever after as distrusting the likelihoods of their Title Declaration of the Heir Apparent in the Princes life being Partial no sure president Partial establishing of Succession by Parlament is no extraordinary thing with Princes which yet most commonly have been to little purpose So did Richard 3. cause John de la Pole Earle of Lincoln and Son to his sister Elisabeth Dutchess of Suffolk to be declared Heir apparent thereby excluding his Brother Edward's four Daughters c. So did Henry 8. prefer the issue of his yonger sister before that of his elder So did Edward 6. declare the Lady Jane Gray his cozen Germain removed to be his Heir and Successor excluding his own two sisters Such say they was the aforesaid Declaration of Roger Mortimer by Richard 2. to as little purpose as from little equity Uncle preferred before the Nephew divers times Contra Sect. 83. That John of Gant should have in right succeeded his father rather than Richard himself as neerer to his father is proved by the course of divers Kingdoms where the Uncle was preferred before the Nephew 1. In Naples much about the same time Robert before Charles the son of Martel his elder Brother 2. In Spain Don Sancho Bravo before the Children of Prince Don Alonso de la Cerda from whom the House of Medina Celi is discended by sentence of Don Alonso the wise and of all the Realm and Nobility Anno 1276. 3. In the Earldom of Arthois Mande before Robert son to her Brother Philip by sentence of Philip le Bel of France confirmed by the Parlament of Paris and by his Successor Philippes de Valois whom he the said Robert had much assisted in the recovery of France from the English 4. In Britanie John Breno Earle of Montfort before Jane Countess of Bloys Daughter and Heir of Guy his elder brother by sentence of Edward 3. and the State of England who put him in possession of that Dukedom 5. In Scotland where albeit Edward 1. of England gave sentence for John Baliol Nephew to the elder Daughter excluding thereby Robert Bruse son to the yonger yet that sentence was held to be unjust in Scotland and the Crown restored to Robert Bruse his son whose posterity holds it to this day 6. The like whereof in Naples Lewis Prince of Taranto son to Philip prevailed before Joan the Neece of Robert aforesaid who was Philip's elder brother though Philip died before Robert because he was a man and a degree neerer to his Grand-father than Joan. 7. And in England it self Henry 1. preferred before William son and Heir of Robert of Normandie his elder brother And King John preferred before Arthur D. of Britanie the son and Heir of his elder brother Geoffrey because he was neerer to Richard his brother then dead than was Arthur Which Right of his the English inclined still to acknowledge and admit and thereupon proclaimed him King notwithstanding that the French and other Forrein Princes of stomach opposed themselves against it King John rightfully preferred before his Brother Arthur Against this last King Richard when he was to go to the Holy Land caused his Nephew Arthur to be declared Heir apparent to the Crown thereby shewing his Title to be the better Answ 1. It was not by Act of Parlament of England for Richard was in Normandie when he made it 2. Richard did it rather to repress the amhitious Humor of John in his absence 3. This Declaration was never admitted in England but renounced by consent of the Nobility in his absence 4. Richard himself at his return disadvowed it appointing John to be his Successor by his last Will and caused the Nobles to swear Fealtie unto him as to his next in blood The Opinion of Civil Lawyers touching the Right of the Uncle and Nephew Contra Sect. 83. This Controversie divided all the Lawyers in Christendom Baldus Oldratus Panormitanus c. for the Nephew Bartolus Alexander Decius Alciatus Cujatius c. for the Uncle Baldus himself at length concludeth That seeing rigor of Law runneth only with the Uncle being properly neerest in blood by one degree and that only indulgence and custom permitteth the Nephew to represent his Father's place whensoëver the Uncle is born before the Nephew and his elder brother dieth before his Father as in the case of John of Gant and Richard 2. he may be
preferred for the elder brother cannot give or transmit that thing to his Son which is not in himself before his Father die nor can his son represent what the Father never had The Common-Law dealeth not with the Point of Succession to the Crown Touching the Common Law the right and interest to the Crown is not expresly decided in it nor is it a Plea subject to the rules thereof but superior and more eminent nor are the Maxims thereof alwayes of force in this as in others As in the case of Dower Copercenars and Tenancie by the courtesie No more ought they to be in this case of inheritance as by the former eight Presidents hath been shewed The Common Lawyers then refer this point of the Crown to Custom nothing being in effect written by them touching it Only the best of our old ones favored that title of Lancaster and Chancelor Fortescue and Sir Tho. Thorope chief Baron of the Exchequer in Henry 6. his time were much afflicted for it by the contrary faction The Princes of York often Attainted The Princes of York forfeited their Right by their Conspiracies and Attainder thereupon as R. Earle of Cambridge put to death therefore by the Judgment of his Peers his elder brother the Duke of York being one of the Jury that condemned him His son Richard Duke of York was also attainted of treason after many oaths to Henry 6. sworn and broken by him and his son Ed. 4. with the rest of his off-spring to the ninth degree at a Parlament at Coventry Anno 1459. But the House of Lancaster was never attainted of any such crime The Hous of York came to the Crown by Violence and Crueltie Edward 4. entred by violence wilfully murthering besides divers of the Nobilitie Henry 6. a good and holy King and his son Prince Edward dispossessing the Hous that had held the Crown about 60 years together in which time their Title had been confirmed by many Parlaments Oaths Approbations and publick Acts of the Common-wealth and the consent of all forreign Nations All which had been enough to have autorized a bad Title Those of Lancaster better Princes than those of York The 4 Henries of the hous of Lancaster were far more worthie Princes then the 4 Princes of the Houses of York as Edw. 4. Rich. 3. Hen. 8. Edw. 6. And if the affairs of any the former especially the 3d succeeded not the chief caus thereof was the sedition rebellion and troubles raised by those of York and their contention against the Princes of the Houses of Lancaster The Cruelty of the Princes of York one to the other The Princes of York have not been onely cruel to their enemies but to themselvs too embrewing their hands in their own blood Then when they had ruined th'other George Duke of Clarence conspired against Edw. 4. his own brother with whom reconciled Edw. caused him afterwards to bee murthered at Calis Rich. 3. murthered his two young Nephews and Henry 8. a great number of that Hous as Edmund de la Poole his Cousin German Henry Duke of Buckingham his great Ant 's son extinguishing that and ruining this familie Also Henry Courtney Marquis of Exceter his own Cousin german the Ladie Margaret Countess of Salisbury and daughter to George D. of Clarence and her son the L. Montague c. The kindness of the Princes of Lancaster But the Love Union Confidence Faithfulness Kindeness and Loialtie of the Princes of Lancaster towards th'other was very notable as in the 2 brothers of Henry 4 and the 3 brothers of Henry 5. and in five or six Dukes of Somerset their near Cosens which argueth both a marvellous confidence those Princes had in that quarrel and a great blessing of God unto the whole familie that agree'd so well The Successes of such noble Houses as followed either partie Another blessing seemeth to bee bestowed on them That no antient great Houses are remaining at this day in England but such as chiefly took their parts as Arundel Oxford Northumberland Westmerland and Shrewsbury whereas the chief partakers of the other Faction are all destroied as Mowbray Duke of Norfolk De la Poole Duke of Suffolk th' Earl of Salisbury th' Earl of Warwick and many others CAP. III. Examination of the Title of the Hous of Scotland Sect. 28. Allegations for the K. of Scots 1. THat hee is descended of the eldest daughter of Henry 7. without bastardie or other lawful impediment and therefore hath the right of prioritie 2. The benefit would accrew unto the Common-wealth by the uniting of England and Scotland a point long sought for 3. The establishing of true Religion in England Hee is not of the Hous of Lancaster but rather of York Hee is not descended truly of the Hous of Lancaster becaus not of the Ladie Blanch the true heir thereof but of Kathathine Swinford whose children were unlawfully begotten though afterwards legitimated by Parlament so that his best Title is by York inferior to that of Lancaster and therefore is to com in after them of that Hous Forrein birth not just impediment in Succession to the Crown of England Hee is Forrein born and therefore excluded by the Laws of England from inheriting within the land Answ 1. This Assertion in an universal sens is fals for a stranger may purchase and inherit by the right of his wife 7 9 Edw. 4. 11 14 Henrie 7. 2. The Statute of 25 Edw. 3. is to bee restrained unto proper inheritance onely viz. That no person born out of the Allegiance of England whose father and mother were not of the same Allegiance at the time of his birth shall not demand inheritance within the same Allegiance 3. This Statute toucheth not the Crown nor any except express mention bee made thereof 4. The Crown cannot properly bee called an inheritance of Allegiance or within Allegiance beeing held immediately from God 5. The Statute meaneth inheritance by descent onely but the Crown is a thing incorporate and therefore goeth as by Succession Now if a Prior Dean c. or other head incorparate though an alien may inherit or demand Lands in England notwithstanding the Statute much more may the Inheritor to the Crown 6. Express exception is made in the Statues of Enfants du Roi which word cannot but include all the King's off-spring and blood-Roial 7. King Stephen and Henry 2. born out of the Realm and of parents that were not of the Allegiance of England when they were born were yet admitted to the Crown without contradiction which argueth that by the cours of the Common Law there was no such stop against Aliens and that if the Statute would have abridged the antient libertie in this case of Succession it would have made special mention there which it doth not The King of Scots excluded by the last Will of Henry 8. Henry 8. his Will whereby he excludeth the off-spring of Margaret S. 4. Which though somwhat infringed by the testimony of two