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
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
Bastardies or other particular impediments that may have fallen upon each discent or branch thereof all these things said he may alter the course of common supposed right in him or her that is taken to be next in bloud as proving them not to be truly and lawfully the nearest though they be the next in degree As for example said he the whole multitude of competitors or pretendors which I conceive may come in consideration or have action or claim to the Crown after her Majesty that now is may be reduced to three or four first heads or principal stocks to wit to the House of Lancaster a part as descended of John of Gant Duke of Lancaster by his first Wife Blanch sole Heir of the Dutchess of Lancaster And of this branch or stock the most known off spring in these our days are those Princes that are lineally descended of Don Juan the first sirnamed de bona memoria tenth King of Portugal who married with Philippa the eldest Daughter of the said John of Gant by his first Wife Blanch and these Princes are King Philip of Spain now King also of Portugal and the Duke of Parma and Braganza who descended of the same race as also the Duke of Savoy on degree after them The second stock is of the house of York a part descended of George the Duke of Clarence second Brother to King Edward the fourth who being put to death by the Kings order in Cales left a daughter by whom were descended the Earl of Huntington with his Brothers which also have children and the off spring of Geffry Pole and Sir Thomas Barrington who married the other Sister of her that was married to the Hastings The third stock was in King Henry the seventh who being himself of the house of Lancaster and marrying the eldest daughter of Edward the fourth of the house of York is presumed to have joyned these two houses together and from this man by his two daughters for of his Son who was King Henry the eighth there remaineth only the Queen that now is there hath proceeded the house of Scotland divided into the families of the King of Scots and Arabella as also the Progeny of the two Earls yet living of Hartford and Darby Vnto these three heads which are commonly known to all men some of our days do add also a fourth which may seem more ancient then either of these three to wit by the Duke of Britany who are descended divers ways of the bloud royal of England as may easily be declared whose Heir at this day by lineal descent is the Infanta of Spain named Dona Isabella Clara Eugenia daughter to King Philip. So that hereby we come to discover no less then ten or eleven families that may pretend and have all of them friends in England and else where as yesterday I told you who do not fail in secret to negotiate and lay plots for them for that there are none of these so far off but to their friends it seemeth the times standing as they do that reasons may be given for their preferment and good hope conceived of prevailing You do well to add said a Captain there present the times standing as they do or at leastwise as they are like to stand when this matter must come to tryal at what time I believe not you Lawyers but we Souldiers must determine this title and then no doubt if there were not only these ten by you named but twenty more also of the Bloud Royal that would pretend and had friends and money to stand by them we should admit their causes to examination and perhaps give sentence for him that by your laws would soonest be excluded for when matters come to snatching it is hard to say who shall have the better part I do not add this circumstance of the time said the Lawyer as though it were the only or principal point which maketh doubtful the matter of Succession though I confess that helpeth thereunto greatly in respect of the great variety of mans affections at this day in Religion which do decline them commonly to judge for him whom they best love but besides this I do say that were the times never so quiet and Religion never so uniform yet are there great doubts in many mens heads about the lawfulness of divers Petitions of the Families before-named but if you add unto this the said wonderful diversity in matters of Religion also which this time yieldeth you shall find the event much more doubtful and consequently it is no marvel though many may remain in hope to prevail seeing that where many are admitted to stand for a preferment there divers may have propability also of speeding An example you may take said the Civilian Lawyer in the Roman Conclave at the Popes election where among three or four score Cardinals that enter in for Electors few there are that have not hope also to be elected not for that they see themselves all well qualified as others but because often times when divers that are more forward by likelyhood cannot be agreed upon it falleth to the lot of him that is farthest off and so it may among your pretenders quoth he in England Your example said the Temporal Lawyer confirmeth somewhat of that I mean though it be not altogether in like matter or manners for that the Pope is made by Election and here we talk of a King by Succession Your Succession said the Civilian includeth also an Election or approbation of the common-wealth and so doth the succession of all Kings in Christendom besides as well appeareth by the manner of their new admision at their Coronations where the people are demanded again if they be content to accept such a man for their King though his title of nearness by bloud be never so clear And therefore much more it is like to be in this case of English pretenders now where their lawful nearness in bloud is so doubtful as you have signified and so I do come to confirm your former proposition of the doubtfulness of the next Successor in England with another reason besides that which you have alledged of the ambiguity of their true propinquity in bloud for I say further that albeit the nearness of each mans succession in bloud were evidently known yet were it very uncertain as things now stand in England and in the rest of Christendom round about who should prevail for that it is not enough for a man to be next only in bloud thereby to pretend a Crown but that other circumstances also must concur which if they want the bare propinquity or ancestry of bloud may justly be rejected and he that is second third fourth fifth or last may lawfully be preferred before the first and this by all Law both divine and human and by all reason conscience and custom of all Christian Nations To this said the temporal Lawyer you go further Sir then
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
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
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.
Issue The meeting of three Houses Prince Edward Duke Edmond Lady Beatrix daughter of K. Henry 3. The Pedegree of the Dukes of Britany The great Contention between the Houses of Monford and Bloâ—s in Britany Burgundy and Orleans The controversie between the House of Monford and Blois A question about succession between the Uncle and the Niece The House of Blois overcome The succession of the Monfords in Britany Francis last Duke of Britany How the Dukedom of Britany was united to France The Issue Male of K. Henr. 3. The Bishop of Ross in his Book of the Queen of Scots Title George Lilly in fine Epitomes Chron. Anglic. That Edward was the elder Mat. West in vit H. 3. Hollingshed ibid. p. 654. Hollingsh in vit H. 3. p. 740. 777. Edmonds Line never pretended to the Crown Note this consequent The eldership of Edmond a fiction Polyd. in fine vit Henr. 3. The Issue of K. Edward the â— The Issue of Edmond Crouch-back Collateral Lines of Lancaster 〈…〉 of K Edward 3. The Red Rose and the White Issue of the Black Prince The Issue of Leonel the 2d Son The Issue of Edmond the 4. Son The Issue of Thomas the 5. Son The Issue of of the 3d. â—n Duke of Lancast. The Issue of L. Blanch. Lady Philippa married into Portugal and her Issue Lady Elizabeth second Daughter The Issue of K. Henr. 4. The Issue of John of Gaunt by his second Wife The controversie in Spain between King Peter the Cruel and his Bastard broohâ—r Garibay l. 15. â— 26. Of Lady Catharine Swinford Hollinshed in vita Rich. 2. p. 1088. The Duke of Lancaster 's bastards made legitimate Hollingh in vita Kich 2. pag. 1090. The issue of Katharine Swinfords children King Henry VII The Dukes of Somerset Polidor hist. Ang. lib. 23. Hollings in vita Edwardi IV. pa. 1314. 1340. What heirs of Lancaster now remain in England The Issue of the House of York Richard Earl of Cambridge executed Richard Duke of York slain Edward Duke of York and King his Issue The Line of the Pooles The Line of the Hastings The Barringtons King Richard 3. Issue of K. Henry the 7. Issue of the Lady Mary of Scotland Issue of Mary 2d Sister to K. Henry Lady Frances Stow An. 7 Edw. 6. Of Lady Eleanor of Suffolk Variety of Authors opinions about this controversie Polyd. in fine vit Henr. 3. initio vit Henr. 4. in vit Ric. An. 1386. The Allegations of the House of York The story of the controversie between Lancaster and York Polyd. in â—â—a Riâ—h 2. l. b. 20. King Richards deposition Chief points of the controversie between Lancaster and York Three pâ—â—â—t King Richards deposition That a 〈…〉 1. Reason 2. Authority 3. Examples Whether the causes were sufficient of King Richards deposition The Hâ—â—se of York chief 〈◊〉 in deposing K. Rich. Polyd. Hist. Angl. l. 20. Addit ad Polycronicon Testimony of Stories The evil government of K. Rich. Stow in vit Rich. 2. pag. 502. regni 11. A great insolency The evil Parliament Stow an 21 regni Rich. The Duke of Lancaster called by common request Frosard Walsingham Whether the manner of deposing K. Richard were good Arms necessary for removing an evil Prince 〈◊〉 of 〈…〉 by 〈◊〉 Forces King Eglon slain in his Chamber Judg. 3. Saul put down by violence 1 Chr. 10. vers 9. Rehoboam deposed by his Subjects of ten Tribes 2 Reg. 11. 12. 2 Paralip cap. 10. Joram and his Mother Jezabel deposed by force 4 Reg. 9. Athalia deprived by force 4 Reg. 11. Whether Lancaster or York should have entred after K. Rich. Polydor l. 20. in vit Rich. Stow in vita Richardi 2. Whether 〈◊〉 Earl of 〈…〉 or 〈…〉 K. Râ—â—h The Title of York is by a Woman Stow in vit Hen. 5. an 3. regn The Earl of Cambridge executed for Conspiracy An objection for York that Edmond Mortimer was declared Heir appaâ—â—n Polyd. l. 20 Stow in vit Rich. 2. an 1385. Hollingsh in vit Rich 2. p. 1038. Stow an 1382. Polyd. l. 20 an 1394. The cause of hatred between K. Richard and the House of Lancaster John Frosard in Histor. Polydor. Hollingsh Stow in vit Rich. 2 Wâ—lâ—â—â—gh 〈…〉 2. p. 341. 3â—â— John Frosard in vit Henriet 〈◊〉 Roger Moâ—tiâ—â—â— was deâ—lâ—red Hâ—â—r 〈◊〉 Hollingsh in vit Richar. 3. p. 1406. in vit Edwar. 6. p. 1715. The declaration of K. Edw. 6. in favour of the Lady Jane Gray Girard du Haillan l. 15. his Franc. initio 〈…〉 〈◊〉 in â—â—tent Poâ—â—â—nem Câ—â—e suis leg haered The second â—â—â—mâ—le of the Uncle An examâ—plâ— of the Uncle before 〈◊〉 Nephew in Spain Garâ—bay l. 13. c. 1â— an 1276. Another example in France and Flanders Polydor. l. 15. in vit Edw. 3. Anoâ—â—eâ— example of Britany Supra c. 2. Another example â—n Scotland The contention of the Houses of â—alliol and Bruse in Scotl. Examples in England Hollingsh in vit Regis Johannis p. 142. How Arthur Duke of Britany was declared Heir apparent Polydor l. 14. Hollingsh in vit Ric. 1. p. 480. Hollingsh in vit Richardi Regis p. 496. 499. Hollingsh p. 540. Walsingh in Ypodig Neustriae Opinions of Lawyers for the Nephew and Uncle Benedict Cap. Ranutius verb. in eodem testam Baldus in lib. ut in test cap. de suis leg haered per. li. unicam pro 20. sui autem novissimo Touching the Common Law of England Different rules in succession of the Crown of other Inheritances The Common Law grounded in Custom Ancient Lawyers that defended the House of Lancaster Hollingsh in vit Henrici 6. p. 1300. The sum of this controversie repeated Other Arguments of Lancaster Stow in vit Hen. 5. p. 587. The Princes of York often attainted Stow in vit Hen. 6. York entred by violence Stow in fine vit Henrici 6. The House of York put down a Holy King Long possessions of the House of Lancaster 5. The difference of Kings of both Houses The Princes of York cruel one to the other Polydor Virg Hist. Angl. l. 24. Great union and faithfulness of the Princes of Lancaster Polydor lib. 23. Dissentioâ—s in the House of York K. Edw. 4. K. Riâ—h 3. K. Henry 8. how many he put to death of his own Kindred The de la Pools The House of Buckingham The House of Câ—urtâ—eys The House of Salisbury Seymers put to death Queen of Scots 7. Nâ— old noble House standing in England but such as took part with Lancaster Five ancient noble houses Arondel Oxford Northumberland Westmerland Shrewsbury Houses that favoured York destroyed 〈…〉 〈…〉 Pooâ—â—◠〈…〉 of 〈◊〉 and Warwick King Henry the 7. Chowned in the field in respect of the house of Lancaster only though his title that way was not great A division of the families that do pretend Of the house of Scotland Arabella In favour of the King of Scots Argument against the King of Sâ—ots The King of Scots
with divers sorts of musical Instruments under Asaph Heman and other principal men that should be Heads of the Choir He appointed all Officers needful both for his Court and also the Commonwealth with the Arms of the Crown which was a Lion in remembrance of the Lion that he slew with his own hands when he was a Child He ordained a Mint with a peculiar form of Money to be stamped took order for distributing Relief to the poor and other like Acts of a prudent and pious Prince After all this he turn'd himself to his old Exercise of War to which he was given from his childhood being wonderful valiant of his own person as appeareth by the Lion and Bear that he slew with his own hands and the courage wherewith he took upon him the combat with Goliah and as he had shewed himself a great Warrier and renowned Captain many years in the service of Saul against the Philistines and had gained many noble Victories so much more did he after he was King himself for that he conquered not only the Philistines but also the Amorites Idumeans and Moabites with the Kings and People of Damasco and all Syria even unto the River Euphrates and left all these Countries peaceable to his Successor and the Scripture recounteth in one only Chapter how that in three or four Battels wherein David himself was present within the space of two or three years almost a hundred thousand Horse and Foot were slain by him and that himself slew in his days eight hundred with his own hands and that he made by his Example Thirty seven such Captains as each one of them was able to lead and govern a whole Army and yet among all these Expences of Wars had he care to lay up so much Money and Treasure as was sufficient for the building an huge and wonderful Temple after him which he recommended to his Son Solomon And amidst all this Valour and Courage of so warlike a King and Captain had he so much Humility as to humble himself to Nathan the Prophet when he came to rebuke him for his Fault and so much Patience and Charity as to pardon Shimâ—i that reviled him and threw stones at him in the High-way as he went And among so many and continual businesses both Martial and Civil and great affairs of the Commonwealth he had time to write so many Psalms as we see and to sing praises seven times a day to Almighty God and to feel that Devotion at his death which we read of And finally he so lived and so died as never Prince I think before him nor perhaps after him so joyned together both Valour and Vertue Courage and Humility Wisdom and Piety Government and Devotion Nobility and Religion Wherefore though I have been somewhat longer than I would in this Example yet hath it not been from the purpose to note somewhat in particular what two worthy Kings were put up by God in place of two other by him deprived and deposed And now if we will leave the Hebrews and return to the Romans of whom we spake before we shall find divers things notable in that State also to the purpose we have in hand For before I told you how that Romulus their first King having by little and little declined into Tyranny he was slain and cut in pieces by the Senate which at that time contained a hundred in number and in his place was chosen Numa Pompilius the notablest King that ever they had who prescribed all their order of Religion and manner of Sacrifices imitating therein and in divers points the Rites and Ceremonies of the Jews as Tertullian and other Fathers do note He began also the building of their Capitol added the two Months of January and February to the Year and did other such notable things for that Common-wealth Again When Tarquinus the proud their seventh and last King was expelled by the same Senate for his evil Government and the whole Government changed as before hath been touched we see the success was prosperous for that not only no hurt came thereby to the Commonwealth but exceeding much good seeing their Government and increase of Empire was so prosperous under their Consuls for many years in such sort that whereas at the end of their Kings Government they had but fifteen miles Territory without their City it is known that when their Consuls Government ended and was changed by Julius Caesar their Territory reached more â—han fifteen thousand miles in compass for that they had not only Europe under their Dominion but the principal parts also of Asia and Africa So as this chastisement so justly laid upon their Kings was profitable and beneficial to their Commonwealth also Moreover When Julius Caesar upon particular Ambition had broken all Law both Humane and Divine and taken all Government into his own hands alone he was in revenge thereof slain as the World knoweth by Senators in the senate-Senate-house and Octavianus Augustus preferred in his room who proved the most famous Emperor that ever was I might note here also how Nero sixth Emperor of Rome which succeeded lawfully his Unkle Claudius in the Empire and being afterward deposed and sentenced to Death by the Senate for his wicked Government which was the first judicial Sentence that ever the Senate gave against an Emperour albeit peace ensued not presently but that Galba Otho and Vitellius three Captains of the Empire made some little interludes of tragical killing one another yet within few months the whole Empire by that means fell upon Vespatian and his Son Titus two of the best Governours that ever those times saw The like might be noted of the noble rank of five excellent good Princes viz Nerva Trajan Adrian Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius that ensued in the Empire by the just Death of cruel Domitian which Execution the Senate is thought in secret to have procured not being able to perform it openly by Justice which was seen by that that when the act was done the Senate did presently by publick Decree allow of the same and disannulled all his barbarous Acts for their exceeding Cruelty and commanded his Arms and Memories to be pulled down every where and chose for his Successor one Coccenis Nerva an Italian a man of excellent Vertue by whom they enjoyed not only the most prosperous time of his Government but of all those four before-named that ensued him no less worthy than himself Not long after the succession of these excellent good Emperours there came to the Crown by lawful Descent of Bloud a Youth named Antonius Heliogabalus Son of the Emperour Antonius Carcalla and Nephew to the most famous and noble Emperour Septimus Severus that died in England Which Youth as he was greatly loved and honoured a great while for so worthy a Grand-father so afterwards for his own most beastly Life and foul Actions he was
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
that course was altered again and Henry his Son admitted for King And thus much of the Sons of King Henry II. But of his Daughters by the same Lady Eleanor Heir of Gascony Belforest in his Story of France hath these words following King Henry had four Daughters by Eleanor of Aquitain the eldest whereof was married to Alonso the IX of that name King of Castile of which Marriage issued Queen Blanch Mother to S. Lewis King of France The second of these two Daughters was espoused to Alexis Emperour of Constantinople The third was married to the Duke of Saxony and the fourth was given to the Earl of Tholosa Thus being the French Stories of these Daughters Of the marriage of the eldest Daughter of these four whose name was Eleanor also as her Mothers was with King Alonso the IX of Castile there succeeded many Children but only one son that lived whose name was Henry who was King of Castile after his Father by the name of Henry the I and â—ied quickly without Issue and besides this Henry two Daughters also were born of the same marriage of which the eldest and Heir named Blanch was married by intercession of her Uncle King John of England with the foresaid Prince Lewis of France with this express condition as both Polydor in his English Story and Garibay the Chronicler of Spain do affirm that she should have for her Dowry all the States that King John had lost in France which were almost all that he had there and this to the end he might not seem to have lost them by force but to have given them with the marriage of his Neece and so this marriage was made and her Husband Lewis was afterward chosen also King of England by the Barons and sworn in London as before hath been said And hereby also the Infanta of Spain before mentioned that is descended lineally from both these Princes I mean as well from Queen Blanch as from Lewis is proved to have her pretence fortified to the Interest of England as afterwards shall be declared more at large in due place The second Daughter of King Alonso the IX by Queen Eleanor was named Berenguela and was married to the Prince of Leon in Spain and had by him a Son named Fernando who afterwards when King Henry her Brother was dead was admitted by the Castilians for their King by the name of Fernando the IV. as before the Civilian hath noted and Blanch with her Son S. Lewis though she were the elder was put by the Crown against all right of Succession as Garibay the Spanish Chronicler noteth and confesseth Hereby then some do gather that as the first Interest which the Crown of England had to the States of Gascony Guyenne and Poyters came by a woman so also did it come to France by the right of this foresaid Blanch whereof the favourers of the Infanta of Spain do say that she being now first and next in bloud of that House ought to inherit all these and such like States as are inheritable by women or came by women as the former States of Gascony and Guyenne did to King Henry the II by Queen Eleanor his wife and Normandy by Mathilda his mother and both of them to France by this former interest of Blanch. And more they say that this Lady Blanch mother to King S. Lewis whose Heir at this day the Infanta of Spain is should by right have inherited the Kingdom of England also after the murther of Duke Arthur and his Sister Eleanor for that she was the next of â—in unto them at that time which could be capable to succeed them for that King John himself was uncapable of their succession whom he had murthered and his Son Henry was not then born nor in divers years after and if he had been yet could he receive no Interest thereunto by his Father who had none himself of all which points there will be more particular occasion to speak hereafter Now then I come to speak of King Henry the third who was Son to this King John and from whom all the three Houses before mentioned of Britany Lancaster and York do seem to issue as a triple branch out of one Tree albeit the Royal Line of Britany is more ancient and was divided before even from William the Conquerors time as hath been shewed yet do they knit again in this King Henry for that of King Henry the third his eldest Son named Prince Edward the first descended Edward the second and of him Edward the third from whom properly riseth the House of York And of his second Son Edmond surnamed Crookback County Palatine of Lancaster issued the Dukes of Lancaster until in the third descent when the Lady Blanch Heir of that House matched with John of Gaunt third Son of King Edward the third from which marriage rose afterward the formal division of these two Houses of Lancaster and York and also two distinct branches of Lancaster Besides these two Sons King Henry the third had a Daughter named Lady Beatrix whom he married to John the second of that name Duke of Britany who after was slain at Lions in France by the fall of an old Wall at the Coronation of Pope Clement the 5th of that name in the year of Christ 1298. and for that the Friends of the Infanta of Spain do seek to strengthen her Title by this her descent also of the Royal bloud of England from Henry the third as afterward shall be declared I will briefly in this place continue the Pedegree of the House of Britany from that I left before even to our days I shewed before in this Chapter that Geoffry the third Son to King Henry the second and Duke of Britany by his wife being dead and his two Children Arthur and Eleanor put to death by their Uncle King John in England as before hath been said it fell out that Constance Dutchess and Heir of Britany married again to Guy Viscount of Tours and had by him two Daughters whereof the eldest named Alice was Dutchess of Britany and married to Peter Brien Earl of Drusse and by him had John the first of that name Duke of Britany which John the first had issue John the second who married Lady Beatrix before-mentioned Daughter to King Henry the third and by her had the second Arthur Duke of Britany to whom succeeded his eldest Son by his first Wife named John the third who dying without Issue left the very same trouble and garboil in Britany about the succession between the two noble Houses of Blois and Monford the one maintained by France and the other by England as soon after upon the very like occasion happen'd in England between the Houses of Lancaster and York as after shall be shewed And not long after that again the like affliction also ensued in France though not for succession but upon other occasions between
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
daughter and Heir of Leonel Duke of Clarence and was Grandfather to the last Edmond by me named should be Heir apparent to the Crown if the King should chance to die without Issue To which objection those of Lancaster do answer first that Polydor doth erre in the person when he saith that Edmond Husband of Lady Philippa was declared for Heir apparent for that this Edmond Mortimer that married Lady Philippa died peaceably in Ireland three years before this Parliament was holden to wit in the year of Christ 1382. as both Hollingshed Stow and other Chroniclers do testifie and therefore Polydor doth erre not only in this place about this man but also in that in another place he saith that this Edmond so declared Heir apparent by King Richard was slain by the Irish in Ireland 12 years after this declaration made of the succession to wit in the year 1394. which was indeed not this man but his Son Roger Mortimer Heir to him and to the Lady Philippa his Wife who was declared Heir apparent in the Parliament aforesaid at the instance of King Richard and that for especial hatred and malice as these men say which he did bear against his said Uncle the Duke of Lancaster and his Son Henry whom he desired to exclude from the succession The cause of this hatred is said to be for that presently upon the death of Prince Edward Father to this Richard which Prince died in the year of Christ 1376. and but 10. months before his Father King Edward the third there wanted not divers learned and wise men in England that were of opinion that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster eldest Son then living of the said King Edward should have succeeded his Father jure propinquitatis before Richard that was but Nephew and one degree further off then he but the old King was so extremely affectionate unto his eldest Son the black Prince Edward newly dead that he would not hear of any to succeed him as Frosard saith but only Richard the said Prince's Son Wherefore he called presently a Parliament which was the last that ever he held and therein caused his said Nephew Richard to be declared Heir apparent and made his three Sons then living that were Uncles to the Youth to wit John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster Edmond Langley Duke afterwards of York and Thomas Woodstock Duke of Gloucester to swear Fealty unto Richard as they did And albeit John of Gaunt all his life after for keeping of his Oath that he had made unto his Father never pretended any Right to the Crown yet King Richard knowing well the pretence that he and his might have was still afraid of him and sought infinite means to be rid of him first by perswading him to go and make War in Spain where he thought he might miscarry in so dangerous an attempt and then offering to give him all Aquitain if he would leave England to go and live there as he did for three years with extreme peril for that the people of Aquitain would not receive him but rose against him and refused his Government and would not admit him for their Lord but appealed to the King who also allowed thereof and so when John of Gaunt came home into England again King Richard thought no better way to weaken him then to banish his Son Henry Duke of Hertford and so he did And besides this the said King Richard practised also by divers secret drifts the death of his said Uncle the Duke of Lancaster as Walsingham witnesseth and when the said Duke came at length to die which was in the 22. year of King Richard's reign he wrote such joyous Letters thereof as Frosard saith to his Father-in-law Charles the sixth King of France as though he had been delivered of his chiefest Enemy not imagining that his own destruction was so near at hand and much accelerated by the death of the said Duke as it was And these were the causes say the favourers of the House of Lancaster why King Richard caused this Act of Parliament to pass in favour of Roger Mortimer and in prejudice of the House of Lancaster and not for that the right of Earl Mortimer was better then that of the Duke of Lancaster And this they say is no new thing for Princes oftentimes to procure partial Laws to pass in Parliament for matter of Succession according to their own affections for the like say they did Edward the third procure in the favour of this Richard as before I have shewed in the last Parliament before his death and afterward again King Richard the third with much more open Injustice caused an Act of Parliament to pass in his days whereby his Nephew John de la Pole Earl of Lincoln Son to his Sister Elizabeth Dutchess of Suffolk was declared Heir apparent to the Crown excluding thereby the Children of his two elder Brothers to wit the daughters of King Edward the fourth and the Son and daughter of George Duke of Clarenoe which yet by all order should have gone before their Sisters Children And like facility found King Henry the 8th to get the consent of two Parliaments to give him Authority to appoint what Successor he would of his own Kindred by which Authority afterward he appointed by his Testament as in another place shall be shewed that the Issue of his younger Sister Mary should be preferred before the Issue of his eldest Sister Margaret of Scotland A like declaration was that also of King Edward the sixth of late memory who appointed the Lady Jane Gray his Cousen-german removed to be his Heir and Successor in the Crown of England and excluded his own two Sisters the Lady Mary and the Lady Elizabeth from the same but these declarations make little to the purpose when right and equity do repugn as these men say that it did in the foresaid declaration of Roger Mortimer to be Heir apparent for that they hold and avouch the House of Lancaster to have had the true right to enter not only after the death of King Richard the second as it did but also before him that is to say immediately upon the death of King Edward the third for that John of Gaunt was then the eldest Son which King Edward had living and nearer to his Father by a degree then was Richard the Nephew About which point to wit whether the Uncle or Nephew should be preferred in Succession of Kingdoms it seemeth that in this age of King Edward the third there was great trouble and controversie in the World abroad for so testifieth Girard du Haillan Councellor and Secretary of France in his History of the year of Christ 1346. which was about the midst of King Edwards Reign and therefore no marvel though King Edward took such care of the sure establishing of his Nephew Richard in Succession as is before related And much less marvel is it if K.
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
before hath been declared and preferreth it self in degree of Propinquity not only before the aforesaid two Houses of Scotland and Clarence but also before this other part of the House of Suffolk I mean the Family of Hartford though descended of the elder Daughter for that the Countess of Darby doth hold her self one degree nearer in descent than are the other Pretenders of Hartford as hath been shewed And albeit there want not many Objections and Reasons of some against this pretence of the House of Darby besides that which I have touched before yet for that they are for the most part personal Impediments and do not touch the right or substance of the title or any other important reason of State concerning the Common-wealth but only the mislike of the persons that pretend and of their Life and Government I shall omit them in this place for that as in the beginning I promised so I shall observe as much as in me lies to utter nothing in this Conference of ours that may justly offend and much less touch the Honour and Reputation of any one Person of the Bloud-Royal of our Realm when the time of admitting or excluding cometh then will the Realm consider as well of their Persons as of their Rights and will see what account and satisfaction each person hath given of his former life and doings and according to that will proceed as is to be supposed But to me in this place it shall be enough to treat of the first point which is of the Right and Interest pretended by way of Succession And so with this I shall make an end of these Families and pass over to others that do yet remain CHAP. VII Of the Houses of Clarence and Britany which contain the â—laims of the Earl of Huntington with the Pooles as also of the Lady Infanta of Spain and others of those Families HAving declared the Claims Rights and Pretences which the two Noble Houses of Scotland and Suffolk descended of the two Daughters of King Henry VII have or may have to the Succession of England with intention afterward to handle the House of Portugal apart which pretendeth to comprehend in it self the whole Body or at lâ—ast the first and principal Branch of the ancient House of Lancaster it shall not be amiss perhaps by the way to treat in this one Chapter so much as appertaineth to the two several Houses of Clarence and Britany for that there is less to be said about them then of the other And first of all I am of opinion that the Earl of Huntington and such other pretenders as are of the House of York alone before the Conjunction of both Houses by King Henry VII may be named to be of the House of Clarence and so for distinction sake I do name them not to confound them with the Houses of Scotland and Suffolk which are termâ—d also by the Lancastrians to be of the House of York alone for that they deny them to be of the true House of Lancaster but principally I do name them to be of the House of Clarence for that indeed all their Claim and Title to the Crown doth desâ—end from George Duke of Clarence as before in the third Chapter and elsewhere hath been declared which Duke George being Brother to King Edward IV. and put to death by his order left Issue Edward Earl of Warwick and of Salisbury who was put to death by King Henry VII in his youth and Margaret Countess of Salisbury which Margaret had Issue by Sir Richard Poole Henry Poole Lord Montague afterwards beheaded and he again Katharine married to Sir Francis Hastings Earl of Huntington by whom she had Sir Henry Hastings now Earl of Huntington Sir George Hastings his Brother yet living and others So as the Earl of Huntington with his said Brethren are in the fourth degree from the said George Duke of Clarence to wit his Nephews twice removed The said Margaret Countess of Salisbury had a younger Son also named Sir Geffrey Poole who had Issue another Geffrey and this Geffrey hath two Sons alive at this day in Italy named Arthur and Geffrey who are in the same degree of distance with the said Earl of Huntington saving that some alledge for them that they do descend all by male-kind from Margaret and the Earl pretendeth by a Woman whereof we shall speak afterwards Hereby then it is made manifest how the Earl of Huntington cometh to pretend to the Crown of England by the House of York only which is no other indeed but by the debarring and disabling of all other former Pretenders not only of Portugal and of Britany as strangers but also of the Houses of Scotland and Suffolk that hold likewise of the House of York and for the Reasons and Arguments which in the former two Chapters I have set down in particular against every one of them and shall hereafter also again those that remain which Arguments and Objections or any of them if they should not be found sufficient to exclude the said other Houses then is the Claim of this House of Huntington thereby made void for that it is as we see by the younger Child of the House of York that is to say by the second Brother So as if either the pretence of Lancaster in general be better than that of Yoâ—k or if in the House of York it self any of the forenamed Pretenders descended from King Edward IV. as of the elder Brother may hold or take place then holdeth not this title of Clarence for that as I have said it coming from the younger Brother must needs be grounded only or principally upon the barring and excluding of the rest that joyntly do pretend Of which Bars and Exclusions laid by this House of Clarence against the rest for that I have spoken sufficiently in the last two Chapters going before for so much as toucheth the two Houses of Scotland and Suffolk and shall do afterwards about the other two of Britany and Portugal I mean in this place to omit to say any more therein and only to consider what the other Competitors do alledge against this House of Clarence and especially against the pretence of the Earl of Huntington as chief Titler thereof for to the excluding of him do concur not only those other of opposite Houses but also the Pooles of his own House as now we shall see First thâ—n the contrary Houses do alledge generally against all this House of Clarence that seeing their Claim is founded only upon the Right of the Daughter of George Duke of Clarence second Brother to King Edward IV. evident it is that so long as any lawful Issue remaineth of any elder Daughter of the said King Edward the elder Brother as they say much doth and cannot be denied no Claim or Pretence of the younger Brothers Daughter can be admitted And so by standing upon this and answering to the Objections alledged before against the
elder Houses they hold this matter for very clear and all pretence of this House of Clarence utterly excluded Secondly the same opposite Houses do alledge divers Attainders against the principal Heads of the House of Clarence whereby their whole Interests were cut off as namely it is to be shewed in three descents one after another to wit in Duke George himself the first Head and Beginner of this House who was Attainted and Executed and then in the Lady Margaret Countess of Salisbury his Daughter and Heir who was likewise Attainted and Executed And thirdly in her Son and Heir Henry Poole Lord Montague put also to death from whose Daughters both the Earl of Huntington and his Brethren together with the Children of Sir Thomas Barrington do descend And albeit some may say that the said House of Clarence hath been restored in Bloud since those Attainders yet reply these men That except it can be shewed that particular mention was made of reabilitating the same to this pretence of Succession to the Crown it will not be sufficient as in like manner they affirm That the same restoring in Bloud if any such were hath not been sufficient to recover the ancient Lands and Titles of Honour which this House of Clarence had before these Attainders for that they were forfeited thereby to the Crown And so say these men was there forfeited thereby in like manner unto the next in Bloud not Attainted this Prerogative of succeeding to the Crown and cannot be restored again by any general Restauration in Bloud except special mention be made thereof even as we see that many Houses Attainted are restored daily in Bloud without restorement of their Titles and Dignities and a present Example we have in the Earl of Arundel restored in Bloud but not to the Title of Duke of Norfolk And this say the opposite Houses against this House of Clarence But now thirdly entreth in also against the Earl of Huntington the opposition of some of his own House which is of the Issue of Sir Geffrey Poole Brother to his Grand-father who say That when the Lord Henry Montague was put to death with his Mother the Countess of Salisbury and thereby both their Pretences and Titles cut off in them then fell such right as they had or might have upon the said Sir Geffrey Poole and not upon his Neece the Lady Katharaine Daughter of the Lord Henry his elder Brother and Mother of the Earl of Huntington and this for three Causes First for that he was not Attainted and so whether we respect his Grand-father George Duke of Clarence or his Great-grand-father Richard Duke of York the said Right in this respect is descended to him And secondly for that he was a degree nearer to the said Duke's Ancestors than was at that time his Neece Katharine which right of nearest Propinquity say these men is made good and lawful by all the Reasons Examples Presidents and Authorities alledged before in the fourth Chapter of this Conference in favour of Uncles before their Nephews And it shall not need that we speak any thing more of that matter in this place but only to remit your remembrance to that which herein hath been said before Fourthly they prove the same in favour of Sir Geffrey for that the Lady Katharine was a Woman and Sir Geffrey a man whose priviledge is so great in a matter of Succession as also hath been touched before that albeit they had been in equal degree and that Sir Geffrey were not a degree before her as he was yet seeing neither of them nor their Fathers were ever in possession of the thing pretended Sir Geffrey should be preferred as hath been shewed before by some Presidents and shall be seen afterwards in the Case of Portugal wherein the King of Spain that now is was preferred to the Crown for that only respect that his Competitors were Women and in equal degree of descent with him and he a Man And the very like Allegations of Propinquity I heard produced for the Lady Winifred Wife of Sir Thomas Barrington if she be yet alive to wit that she is before the Earl of Huntington and his Brethren by this reason of Propinquity in Bloud for that she is one degree nearer to the stock than they Fifthly and lastly both these and other Competitors do alledge against the Earl of Huntington as an important and sufficient bar against his pretence the quality of his Religion which is as they say that he hath been ever known to favour those who commonly in England are called Puritans and not favoured by the State but yet this stop is alledged diversly by Competitors of divers Religions For that such as are followers and favourers of the form of Religion received and defended by publick Authority of England at this day whom for distinction-sake men are wont to call by the name of moderate Protestants these I say do urge this Exclusion against the Earl of Huntington not upon any certain Law or Statute extant against the same but ab equo bono as men are wont to say and by reason of State shewing infinite inconveniencies hurts damages and dangers that must needs ensue not only to the present State of Religion in England but also to the whole Realm and Body-politick if such a man shall be admitted to govern And this Consideration of State in their opinion is a more forceable Argument for Excluding such a man then any Statute or particular Law against him could be for that this comprehendeth the very intention meaning and drift of all Laws and Law-makers of our Realm whose intentions must needs be presumed to have been at all times to have Excluded so great and manifest inconveniencies And thus they say But now those that are of the Roman Religion and contrary both to Puritan and Protestant do urge a great deal further this Argument against the Earl and do alledge many Laws Ordinances Decrees and Statutes both of the Canon and Imperial Laws as also out of the old Laws of England which in their opinion do debar all that are not of their Religion and consequently they would hereby Exclude both the one and the other Pretenders And in fine they do conclude that seeing there wanteth not also some of their own Religion called by them the Catholick in the House of Clarence they have so much the less difficulty to exclude the Earl of Huntington's person for his Religion if one of that House were to be admitted of necessity And this is so much as seemeth needful to be spoken at this time and in this place of this House of Clarence and of the Pretenders thereof It resteth then that I treat something also of the House of Britany and France which two Houses are joyned all in one for so much as may appertain to any Inheritance or Pretence to England or to any parcel or particular state thereof at home or abroad that may follow the
Succession or Right of Women which the Kingdom of France in it self doth not as is known and consequently a Woman may be Heir to the one without the other that is to say she may be Heir to some particular states of France inheritable by Women though not to the Crown it self and so do pretend to be the two Daughters of France that were Sisters to the late King Henry III. which Daughters were married the one to the King of Spain that now is who had Issue by her the Infanta of Spain yet unmarried and her younger Sister married to the Duke of Savoy and the other to wit the younger Daughter of the King of France was married to the Duke of Lorrain yet living by whom she had the Prince of Lorrain and other Children that live at this day This then being so clear as it is first that according to the common course of Succession in England and other Countries and according to the course of all Common Law the 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
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
both of the Blood Royal they are thought to have abâ—sed themselves much by their Marriages with the two Knights Daughters Sir Richard Rogers and Sir John Spenser though otherwise both of them very worshipful but not their Matches in respect of their Kindred with the Crown yet doth the Alliance of S. John Spenser seem to bring many more Friends with it than that of Sir Richard Rogers by reason of the other Daughters of Sir John well married also to Persons of importance as namely the one to Sir George Carey Governour of the Isle of Wight who bringeth in also the Lord Hunsdon his Father Captain of Barwick two of the most important pieces that England hath And for that the said Lord Hunsdon and the Lady Knowles deceased were Brother and Sister and both of them Children to the Lady Mary Bullen Elder Sister to Queen Anne hereof it cometh that this Alliance with Sir George Carey may draw after it also the said House of Knowles who are many and of much importance as also it may do the Husbands of the other Daughters of Sir John Spencer with their adherents and followers which are neither few nor feeble all which wanteth in the Marriage of the Lord Beacham Another difference also in the ability of these two Lords is that the House of Seymers in State and Title of Nobility is much younger than the House of Stanleys for that Edward Seymer late Earl of Hartford and after Duke of Somerset was the first beginner thereof who being cut off together with his Brother the Admiral so soon as they were could not so settle the said House especially in the Alliance with the residue of the Nobility as otherwise they would and might have done But now as it remaineth I do not remember any Alliance of that House of any great moment except it be the Children of Sir Henry Seymer of Hampshire and of Sir Edward Sâ—ymâ—r of Bery Pomery in Devonshire if he have any and of Sir John Smith of Essex whose Mother was Sister to the late Duke of Somerset or finally the Alliance that the late Marriage of the Earl of Hartford with the Lady Frances Howard may bring with it which cannot be much for so great a purpose as we talk of But the Earl of Darby on the other side is very strongly and honourably allied both by Father and Mother for by his Father not to speak of the Stanleys which are many and of good Power and one of them matched in the House of Northumberland his said Father the old Earl had three Sisters all well married and all have left Children and Heirs of the Houses wherein they were married for the elder was married first to the Lord Sturton and after to Sir John Arundel and of both Houses hath lâ—sâ— Hâ—irs-male The second Sister was married to the Lord Mosley by whom she hath left the Lord that now is who in like manner hath matched with the Heir of the Lord Montegle who is likewise a Stanley And finally the third Sister was married to Sir Nicholas Poynes of Glocâ—stershire and by him had a Son and Heir that yet liveth And this by his Fathers side but no less alliance hath this Earl also by the side of his Mother who being Daughter of George Clifford Earl of Cumberland by Lady Eleanor Niece of King Henry the VII the said Lord George had afterward by a second Wife that was Daughter of the Lord Dacres of the North both the Earl of Cumberland that now is and the Lady Wharton who hereby are Brother and Sister of the half Blood to the said Countess of Darby and the Dacrâ—s are their Uncles Besides all this the States and Possessions of the two foresaid Lords are far different for the purpose pretended for that the State of the Earl of Hartford is far inferior both for greatness situation wealth multitude of Subjects and the like for of that of the Stanleys doth depend the most part of the Shires of Lancaster and Chester and a good part of the North of Wales at least wise by way of observance and affection as also the Isle of Mâ—n is their own and Ireland and Scotland is not far off where friendship perhaps in such a case might be offered and finally in this point of ability great oddes is there seen between the Lords As for their Religion I cannot determine what difference there is or may be between them The Lord Beacham by education is presumed to be a Protestant albeit some hold that his Father and Father in Law be more inclined towards the Puritans The Earl of Darby's Religion is held to be more doubtful so as some do think him to be of all three Religions and others of none and these again are divided in judgments about the event hereof for that some do imagine that this opinion of him may do him good for that all sides hereby may perhaps conceive hope of him but others do perswade themselves that it will do him hurt for that no side indeed will esteem or trust him so as all these matters with their events and consequences do remain uncertain But now will I pass to speak of the House of Clarence the chief Persons whereof and most eminent at this day are the Earl of Huntington and his Brethren the Hastings for that the Pooles and Barringtons are of far meaner condition and authority albeit the other also I mean the House of Hastings doth not seem to be of any great alliance for that albeit the old Earl of Huntington this Earl's Father had two Brethren the one Sir Thomas Hastings that married one of the Lord Henry Pooles Daughters named Montagne that was put to death which Daughter was Sister to this Earl's Mother and the other named Sir Edward Hastings was made Lord of Lowghborow by Queen Mary to whom he was first Master of the Horse and afterwards Lord Chamberlain neither of them having left issue and this is all I remember by his Fathers side except it be his own Brethren as hath been said of which Sir George Hastings is the chiefest By his Mothers side he hath only the Pooles whose Power as it is not great so what it is is rather like to be against him than with him partly for their difference from him in Religion and partly for preferment of their own Title upon the reasons before alledged By his own Marriage with the Daughter of the late Duke of Northumberland and Sister to the late Earls of Leicester and Warwick he was like to have drawn a very great and strong alliance if the said two Earls had lived and especially Sir Philip Sidney who was born of the other Sister of the present Countess of Huntington and his own Sister was married to the Earl of Pembroke that now is and himself to the Daughter of Sir Francis Walsingham Chief Secretary of the State by all which means and by all the affection and
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