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
Stow that he had all mens Good-will and was Crowned as his Brother had been at Kingston by Odo Arch-bishop of Canterbury and Reigned nine years with great good will and praise of all men He dyed at last without Issue and so his Elder Nephew Edwin was admitted to the Crown but yet after four years he was deposed again for his lewd and vitious Life and his younger brother Edgar admitted in his place in the year of Christ 959 This King Edgar that entred by deposition of his Brother was one of the rarest Princes that the World had in his time both for Peace and War Justice Piety and Valour Stow saith he kept a Navy of three thousand and six hundred Ships distributed in divers Parts for defence of the Realm Also that he built and restored 47 Monasteries at his own Charges and did other many such Acts he was Father to King Edward the Martyr and Grandfather to King Edward the Confessor though by two different Wives for by his first Wife named Egilfred he had Edwarâ— after martyrized and by his second Wife Alfred he had Etheldred Father to Edward the Confessor and to the end that Etheldred might Reign his Mother Alfred caused King Edward the son of Egilfred to be slain after King Edgar her Husband was dead After this so shameful Murther of King Edward many good men of the Realm were of opinion not to admit the Succession of Etheldred his half Brother both in respect of the Murther of King Edward his elder Brother committed for his sake as also for that he seemed a man not fit to Govern and of this opinion among others was the Holy man Dunston Archbishop of Canterbury as Polidor saith who at length in flat words denyed to consecrate him but seeing the most part of the Realm bent on Etheldred's side he foretold them that it would repent them after and that in this man's Life the Realm should be destroyed as indeed it was and he ran away to Normandy and left Sweno and his Danes in possession of the Realm though afterwards Sweno being dead he returned again and dyed in London This Etheldred had two Wives the first Ethelgina an English Woman by whom he had Prince Edmund sirnamed Ironside for his great strength and valour who succeeded his Father in the Crown of England for a year and at his death left two Sons which after shall be named and besides this Etheldred had by his first Wife other two Sons Edwin and Adelston and one Daughter named Edgina all which were either slain by the Danes or dyed without issue The second Wife of Etheldred was called Emma Sister to Richard Duke of Normandy who was Grandfather to William the Conquerour to wit Father to Duke Robert that was Father to William so as Emma was great Aunt to this William and she bare unto King Etheldred two Sons the First Edward who was afterwards named King Edward the Confessor Alerud who was slain traiterously by the Earl of Kent as presently we shall shew After the death also of King Etheldred Queen Emma was married to the Dane King Canutus the first of that name sirnamed the Great that was King of England after Etheldred and Edmond Ironside his Son and to him she bare a Son named Hardicaâ—utus who Reigned also in England before King Edward the Confessor Now then to come to our Purpose he that will consider the passing of the Crown of England from the death of Edmond Ironside elder Son of King Etheldred until the possession thereof gotten by William Duke of Normandy to wit for the space of 50 years shall easily see what authority the Commonwealth hath in such Affairs to alter titles of Succession according as publick necessity or utility stall require for thus briefly the matter passed King Etheldred seeing himself too weak for Sweno the King of Danes that was entred the Land fled with his Wife Emma and her two children Edward and Alerud unto her Brother Duke Richard of Normandy and there remained until the death of Sweno and he being dead Etheldred returned into England made a certain Agreement and Division of the Realm between him and Canutus the son of Sweno and so dyed leaving his eldest Son Edmond Ironside to succeed him who soon after dying also left the whole Realm to the said Canutus and that by plain Covenant as Canutus pretended that the Longest Liver should have all whereupon the said Canutus took the two Children of King Edmond Ironside named Edmond and Edward and sent them over into Sweedland which at that time was subject also unto him and caused them to be brought up honourably of which Two the Elder named Edmond dyed without issue but Edward was married and had divers Children as after shall be touched Etheldred and his Son Edmond being dead Canutus the Dane was admitted for King of England by the whole Parliament and Consent of the Realm and Crowned by Alerud Archbishop of Canterbury as Polidor saith and he proved an excellent King went to Rome and was allowed by that See also He did many Works of Charity shewed himself a good Christian and very loving and kind to Englishmen married Queen Emma an Englishwoman and Mother to King Edward the Confessor and had by her a Son named Hardicanutus and so dyed and was much mourned by the English after he had Reigned twenty Years though his entrance and Title was partly by Force and partly by Election as before you heard After this Canutus the First sirnamed the Great for that he was King jointly both of England Norway and Denmark was dead Polidor saith that all the States of the Realm met together at Oxford to consult whom they should make King and at last by the more part of Voices was chosen Herauld the first Son of Canutus by a Concubine by which Election we see injury was done to the Lineal Succession of three Parties first to the Sons of King Edmond Ironside that were in Sweedland then to the Princes of Edward and Alerud Sons to King Etheldred and Brothers to Ironside that were in Normandy and thirdly to Hardicanutus Son to Canutus by his Lawful Wife Emma to whom it was also assured at her Marriage that her Issue should succeed if she had any by Canutus After the death of this Harald who dyed in Oxford where he was elected within three years after his Election there came from Denmark Hardicanutus to claim the Crown that his Father and Brother had possessed before him of whose Coming Polidor saith libentissimis animis accipitur communique omnium consensu Rex dicitur He was received with great good-will of all and by common Consent made King and this was done by the States without any respect had of the Succession of those Princes in Normandy and Swedeland and who by birth were before him as hath been shewed and this is the second breach of Lineal Descent after Etheldred
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
what Historiographers do say according to their affections or Interests as what reasons and proofs be alledged of every side for that by this we shall more easily come to judge where the right or wrong doth lie First therefore the defenders of the House of York do alledge that their title is plain and evident for that as in the former chapter hath been declared Richard Duke of York first pretender of this House whose Father was Son to Edmond Langley Duke of York fourth Son of King Edward the third and his Mother Anne Mortimer that was Neece once removed and sole Heir to Leonel Duke of Clarence second Son of the said King Edward this Richard I say Duke of York pretended that for so much as he had two titles joyned together in himself and was lawful Heir as well to Duke Leonel the second Brother as to Duke Edmond the fourth that he was to be preferred in Succession of the Crown after the death of King Richard the second Heir of the first Son of King Edward before the Issue of John of Gaunt that was but third Son to the said King Edward and consequently that Henry Bolenbrok John of Gaunts Son Duke of Lancaster called afterwards King Henry the fourth entred the Crown by tyranny and violonce first for deposing the true and Lawful King Richard and secondly for taking the Kingdom upon himself which Kingdom after the death of the foresaid King Richard which happened in the year 1399. belonging to Edmond Mortimer Earl of March then living and after his death to Anne Mortimer his Sister married to Richard Earl of Cambridge Father to this Richard pretendent Duke of York as hath been said for that this Edmond and Anne Mortimer were Children to Roger Mortimer Son of Philip that was daughter to Duke Leonel which Leonel was elder Uncle to King Richard and before John of Gaunt the younger Brother whose Son took the Crown upon him For the better understanding of which pretence and allegation of the House of York against Lancaster we must note the story following to wit That King Edward the III. seeing in his old age that Prince Edward his eldest Son whom of all his Children he loved most dearly was dead though there wanted not much doubt in some mens heads as after shall be shewed who ought to succeed yet the old man for the exceeding great affection he bare to the dead Prince would hear nothing in that behalf but appointed Richard the said Prince Edwards only Son and Heir to succeed him in the Kingdom and made the same to be confirmed by Act of Parliament and inforced all his Children then alive to swear to the same which were John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster his third and eldest Son that then lived for Leonel his second Son Duke of Clarence was dead before and Edmond Langley and Thomas Woodstock Earls at that time but after Dukes of York and Glocester and so King Richard Reigned with good obedience of his Uncles and their Children for 20 years together but in the end when he grew insolent and had put to death his Uncle the Duke of Glocester together with the Earl of Arundel and banished many others of the Nobility and among them the Archbishop of Canterbury as also his own Cousin-German Henry Duke of Hertford and after of Lancaster Son and Heir of John of Gaunt and had made many wickedd Statutes as well against the Church and State Ecclesiastical as also to intangle the Realm and Nobility with fained crimes of Treason against his Regality as then he termed them the principal men of the Realm seeing a sit occasion offered by the Kings absence in Ireland called home out of France the foresaid Henry Duke of Lancaster with the Archbishop of Canterbury Earls of Arundel and Warwick and others which were in banishment and by common consent gathered upon the suddain such an Army to assist them in England as they took the King brought him to London and there in a Parliament laying together the intolerable faults of his Government they deprived him of all Regal Dignity as before they had done to his great Grandfather K. Edward the second and then by universal consent of the Parliament and people there present they chose and admitted the said Henry Duke of Lancaster to be their King who continued so all the days of his life and left the Crown unto his Son and Sons Son after him by the space of threescore years until this Richard before named Duke of York made challenge of the same in manner and form as before hath been shewed Now then the story being thus the question is first whether Richard the second were justly deposed or no and secondly whether after his deposition the House of York or House of Lancaster should have entred and thirdly if the House of Lancaster did commit any wrong or injustice at their first entrance to the Crown yet whether the continuance of so many years in possession with so many approbations and confirmations thereof by the Commonwealth were not sufficient to legitimate their right Concerning which points many things are alledged by the favourers of both Families and in the first point touching the lawfulness or unlawfulness of King Richards deposition three Articles especially do seem most considerable to wit about the thing in it self whether a lawful King may be deposed upon just causes and secondly about these causes in King Richards deposition to wit whether they were just or sufficient for deposition of the said King and lastly about the manner of doing iâ— whether the same were good and orderly or not And touching the first of these three points which is that a King upon just causes may be deposed I think both parties though never so contrary between themselves will easily agree and the Civil Lawyer seems to me to have proved it so evidently before throughout his whole dicourse as I think very little may be said against the same For he hath declared if you remember both by reason authority and examples of all Nations Christian that this may and hath and ought to be done when urgent occasions are offered And first by reason he sheweth it for that all Kingly authority is given them only by the Commonwealth and that with this express condition that they shall Govern according to Law and equity that this is the cause of their exaltation above other men that this is the end of their Government the butt of their authority the star and pole by which they ought to direct their stern to wit the good of the people by the weal of their Subjects by the benefit of the Realm which end being taken away or perverted the King becometh a Tyrant a Tyger a fierce Lion a ravening Wolf a publick enemy and a bloudy murtherer which were against all reason both natural and moral that a Common-wealth could not deliver it self from so eminent a destruction By authority also
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
affirm by the Causes and Arguments before-alledged against him no reason say they but that this Lady should enter into his place as next in Bloud unto him Secondly it is alledged in her behalf That she is an English woman born in England and of Parents who at the time of her Birth were of English Allegiance wherein she goeth before the King of Scots as hath been seen as also in this other principal point that by her admission no such inconvenience can be feared of bringing in strangers or causing Troubles or Sedition within the Realm as in the pretence of the Scottish King hath been considered And this in effect is all that I have heard alledged for her But against her by other Competitors and their Friends I have heard divers Arguments of no small Importance and Consideration produced whereof the first is that which before hath been alledged against the King of Scotland to wit that neither of them is properly of the House of Lancaster as in the Genealogy set down in the third Chapter hath appeared And secondly That the title of Lancaster is before the pretence of York as hath been proved in the fourth Chapter whereof is inferred that neither the King of Scots nor Arabella is next in Succession And for that of these two propositions there hath been much treated before I remit me thereunto only promising That of the first of the two which is how King Henry VII was of the House of Lancaster touching Right of Succession I shall handle more particularly afterward when I come to speak of the House of Portugal whereby also shall appear plainly what pretence of Succession to the Crown or â—utchy of Lancaster the Descendents of the said King Henry can justly make The second Impediment against the Lady Arabella is the aforesaid Testament of King Henry VIII and the two Acts of Parliament for authorising of the same by all which is pretended that the House of Suffolk is preferred before this other of Scotland A third Argument is For that there is yet living one of the House of Suffolk that is nearer by a degree to the Stem to wit Henry VII to whom after the decease of Her Majesty that now is we must return than is the Lady Arabella or the King of Scots and that is the Lady Margaret Countess of Darby Mother to the present Earl of Darby who was Daughter to Lady Eleanor Daughter of Queen Mary of France that was second Daughter of King Henry VII so as this Lady Margaret Countess of Darby is but in the third degree from the said Henry whereas both the King of Scotland and Arabella in the fourth and consequently she is next in propinquity of Bloud and how greatly this propinquiâ—y hath been favoured in such cases though they were of the younger Line the Examples before-alledged in the fourth Chapter do make manifest Fourthly and lastly and most strongly of all they do argue against the title of this Lady Arabella affirming that the descent is not free from bastardy which they prove first for that Queen Margaret soon after the death of her first Husband and King James the IV. married secretly one Stuart Lord of Annerdale which Stuart was alive long after her marriage with Douglas and consequently this second marriage with Douglas Stuart being alive could not be lawful which they do prove also by another name for that they say it is most certain and to be made evident that the said Archibald Douglas Earl of Anguis had another Wife also alive when he married the said Queen which points they say were so publick as they came to King Henry's ears whereupon he sent into Scotland the Lord William Howard Brother to the old Duke of Norfolk and Father to the present Lord Admiral of England to enquire of these points and the said Lord Howard found them to be true and so he reported not only to the King but also afterwards many times to others and namely to Queen Mary to whom he was Lord Chamberlain and to divers others of whom many be yet living which can and will testifie the same upon the relation they heard from the said Lord William's own mouth whereupon King Henry was greatly offended and would have hindred the Marriage between his said Sister and Douglas but that they were married in secrret and had consumated their Marriage before this was known or that the thing could be prevented which is thought was one especial cause and motive also to the King afterward to put back the Issue of his said Sister of Scotland as by his forenamed Testament is pretended and this touching Arabella's title by propinquity of Birth But besides this the same men do alledge divers reasons also of inconvenience in respect of the Commonwealth for which in their opinions it should be hurtful to the Realm to admit this Lady Arabella for Queen As first of all for that she is a Woman who ought not to be preferred before so many men as at this time stand for the Crown And that it were much to have three Women to Reign in England one after the other whereas in the space of above a thousand years before them there hath not reigned so many of that Sex neither together nor asunder for that from Cordick first King of the West Saxons unto Egbert the first Monarch of the English Name and Nation containing the space of more then 300 years no one Woman at all is found to have Reigned and from Egbert to the Conquest which is almost other 300 years the like is to be observed and from the Conquest downwards which is above 500 years one only Woman was admitted for Inheritrix which was Maud the Empress Daughter of King Henry I. who yet after her â—athers death was put back and King Stephen was admitted in her place and she never received by the Realm until her Son Henry II. was of age to govern himself and then he was received with express condition That he should be Crowned and govern by himself and not his Mother which very condition was put also by the Spaniards not long after at their admitting of the Lady Berenguela younger Sister of Lady Blanch Neece to King Henry II. whereof before often mention hath been made to wit the Condition was That her Son Ferdinando should govern and not she though his title came by her so as this Circumstance of being a Woman hath ever been of much consideration especially where men do pretend also as in our Case they do Another Consideration of these men is that if this Lady should be advanced unto the Crown though she be of Noble Bloud by her Fathers side yet in respect of Alliance with the Nobility of England she is a meer stranger for that her Kindred is only in Scotland and in England she hath only the Candishes by her Mothers side who being but a mean Family might cause much grudging among the
lawful Wiâ—e which was Sister to the Lord Henry Fitz Allen Earl of Arundel which disorder was occasion of much unkindness and hatred between the said Marquess and Earl ever after But the power of the Marquess and favour with King Henry in Womens matters was so great at that time as the Earl could have no remedy but only that his said Sister who lived many years after had an Annuity out of the said Marquesses Lands during her life and lived some years after the said Marquess afterwards made Duke was put to death in Queen Maries time These then are three ways by which the Family of Darby to argue the Issue of Hartford to be Illegitimate but the other two Houses of Scotland and Clarence do urge a former Bastardy also that is common to them both to wit both against the Lady Frances and the Lady Eleanor for that the Lord Charles Brandon also Duke of Suffolk had a Wife alive as before hath been signified when he married the Lady Mary Queen of France by which former Wife he had Issue the Lady Powis I mean the Wife of my Lord Powis of Poistlands in Wales and how long after the new Marriage of her Husband Charles Brandon this former Wife did live I cannot set down distinctly though I think it were not hard to take particular information thereof in England by the Register of the Church wherein she was buried But the Friends of the Countess of Darby do affirm that she died before the Birth of the Lady Eleanor the second Daughter though after the Birth of the Lady Frances and thereby they do seek to clear the Family of Darby of this Bastardy and to lay all four upon the Children of Hartford before-mentioned But this is easie to be known and verified by the means before-signified But now the Friends of Hartford do answer to all these Bastardies That for the first two pretended by the marriages of the two Dukes of Suffolk that either the Causes might be such as their Divorces with their Wives might be lawful and prove them no Marriages and so give them place to marry again or else that the said former Wives did die before these Dukes that had been their Husbands so as by a â—oâ—t-contract and second new Consent given between the Parties when they were now free the said latter Marriages which were not good at the beginning might come to be lawful afterwards according as the Law permitteth notwithstanding that Children begotten in such pretended Marriages where one party is already bound are not made legitimate by subsequent true Marriage of their Parents And this for the first two Bastardies But as for the third Illegitimation of the Contract between the Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford by a Prae-contract made between the said Lady Katharine and the Earl of Pembroke that now liveth they say and affirm that Prae-contract to have been dissolved afterwards lawfully and judicially in the time of Queen Mary There remaineth then only the fourth Objection about the secret Marriage made between the said Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford before the Birth of their eldest Son now called Lord Beacham which to say the truth seemeth the hardest point to be answered For albeit in the sight of God that Marriage might be good and lawful if before their carnal knowledge they gave mutual consent the one to the other to be man and Wife and with that mind and intention had carnal Copulation which thing is also allowed by the late Council of Trent it self which disannulleth otherwise all clandestine and secret Contracts in such States and Countries where the authority of the said Council is received and admitted yet to justifie these kind of Marriages in the face of the Church and to make the Issue thereof legitimate and inheritable to Estates and Possessions it is necessary by all Law and in all Nations that there should be some witness to testifie this Consent and Contract of the parties before their carnal knowledge for that otherwise it should lie in every particular mans hand to legitimate any Bastard of his by his only word to the prejudice of others that might in equity of Succession pretend to be his Heirs and therefore no doubt but that the Archbishop of Canterbury had great reason to pronounce this Contract of the Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford to be insufficient and unlawful though themselves did affirm that they had given mutual Consent before of being Man and Wife and that they came together animo maritali as the Law of Wedlock requireth but yet for that they were not able to prove their said former consent by lawful Witnesses their said Conjunction was rightly pronounced unlawful and so I conclude that the first Son of these two Parties might be legitimate before God and yet illegitimate before men and consequently incapable of all such Succession as otherwise he might pretend by his said Mother And this now is for the first begotten of these two persons for as touching the second Child begotten in the Tower of London divers men of opinion that he may be freed of this Bastardy for that both the Earl and the Lady being examined upon their first Child did confess and affirm that they were Man and Wife and that they had meaning so to be and continue which Confession is thought to be sufficient both for ratifying of their old Contract and also for making of a new if the other had not been made before And seeing that in the former pretended Contract and Marriage there wanted nothing for justifying the same before men and for making it good in Law but only external Testimony of Witnesses for proving that they gave such mutual Consent of minds before their Carnal knowledge for the presence of Priest or Minister is not absolutely necessary no man can say that there wanted Witnesses for testifying of this Consent before second Copulation by which was begotten the second Son for that both the Queen her self and her Council and as many besides as examined these Parties upon their first Act and Child-birth are Witnesses unto them that their full Consents and Approbations to be Man and Wife which they ratified afterward in the Tower by the begetting of their second Child and so for the reasons aforesaid he must needs seem to be legitimate whatsoever my Lord of Canterbury for that time or in respect of the great Offence taken by the Estate against that Act did or might determine to the contrary And this is the sum of that which commonly is treated about these two Families of the House of Suffolk to wit of Hartford and Darby both which Families of Suffolk the other two opposite Houses of Scotland and Clarence do seek to exclude by the first Bastardy or unlawful Contract between the Queen of France and Duke Charles Brandon as hath been seen Of which Bastardy the House of Darby doth endeavour to avoid it self in manner as
made reply by their President and Chancellor and other of their own Councellors residing for the Flemish Nation in the Court of Spain for this Nation hath always a particular Councel there about the King as all other Foreign Nations also have that are under him and by this means they obtained lightly what they would and brought the Governour to what they pleased so as in effect they were absolute Kings in themselves and wrought their Wills in every thing and this is in that time while the Country was quiet But now since this Revolt which hath indured almost these four or five and twenty years what hath succeeded surely there hath not a quarter so many been punished or put to Death in all these years by order of Justice of their King absent as before I have shewed that there were in one day by ther own Earls and Dukes when they were present and that upon far less occasion and cause given then are these for if we take away the two Noblemen Egmond and Horne put to Death at the beginning of these Flemâ—sh Troubles by the Duke of Alva for which some men say also that he had no thanks afterward by the King no man of importance hath been since Executed and the chiefest Towns that have been and are against the King in Holland and Zeeland are suffered until this day to Traffique freely into Spain it self to wit in the Kingdom of Aragon many Heads have been strucken off and much injustice done whereof then riseth this difference no doubt for that the Flemmings are Strangers and far off and the other near at Home and Natural-Born so as this circumstance of being a Stranger and dwelling far off doth them great pleasure and giveth them priviledge above the Home-born Subjects The like I might shew for this matter of punishment in the foresaid States of Italy where if a man do compare the number of them that were put to Death pulled Down or Afflicted by order of Justice or otherwise at the the commandment of the Prince in time of their own Home-born Kings with that which hath been since especially of the Nobility you shall find one for twenty and the reason of this is for that their own Kings were Absolute and had to give an account to no man of their doings and for that they were men and had their Passions and Emulations with the Nobility and might put the same in Execution without Account or Controlment they pulled down and set up at their pleasure and made oftentimes but a Jest of Noblemens Lives and Deaths but now these that are Governours and Vice-roys for a Foreign Prince first they have not so great Authority or Commission as to touch any such Principal persons Lives without giving Relation thereof of first unto their King and Councel and receive again particular order for the same and then they knowing that after their three years Government is ended they must be private men again and stay their fourty days as Subjects under the next new Governour to give Reckoning of their doings against all that shall Accuse them which in these Countries they call to make their residence they take heed what they do and whom they offend so as the condition of Nobility is far different under such a strange Government as this is termed then under a Natural Prince of their own Country which oppresseth them at his pleasure But now to draw near homeward if we will examine and consider what hath passed in England in this point of Massacring our Nobility by our Domestical Princes it is a matter lamentable for it may seem that they have served oftentimes for our Princes to make disport and play with their Heads And to let pass all those which in time of Wars Rebellions and Commotions have been cut off which occasions may seem more justifyable I do read also in our Chronicles that a Sangue freddo as the Italian saith that is to say in time of Peace and by Execution of Justice at the Princes appointment these Noblemen following and Knights by Name were put to Death within the space of one five years in King Henry the fourth his days The Duke of Exeter the Duke of Surry the Archbishop of York the Earls Salisbury of Glocester of Worcester and of Huntington the Earl Mowbray Earl Marshal the Barron of Kinderton Sir Roger Clarington Bastard Son of Edward the Black Prince Sir Thomas Blunt Sir Bernard Rocas Sir Richard Vernon And again soon after under King Edward the fourth in almost within as little space the Dukes of Somorset and of Exeter the Earls of Devonshire of Oxford and of Keyns the Lord Ross the Lord Molyns Sir Thomas Tudingham Sir Philip Wentworth Sir Thomas Fyndam and many others afterwards for this was but at the beginning of his Reign which number of Nobility if a man should have seen them alive together with their Trains before they had been put down he would have said they had been a very goodly company and pityful that so many of our own Nobility should be brought by our own Princes to such Confusion But yet this matter may seem perhaps the less marvellous and more excusable under those two Kings for that Troubles and Contentions had passed a little before in the Realm about the Succession and herupon so many of the Nobility might be cut off But let us see then what ensued afterwards when things were established and all doubt of contention about the Succession taken away as in King Henry VIII the his days it was and yet do I find Registred in our Chronicles these persons following either made away cut off or put down by the said King to wit two Queens Ann and Catharine three Cardinals put down and disgraced Woolsey Pool and Fisher whereof the last was Beheaded soon after his Dignity given him in Rome and the first was Arrested the second Attainted of imagined Treasons three Dukes put down to wit the Noble Dukes of Buckingham Suffolk and Norfolk whereof the last lost his Lands Dignities and Liberty only the former two both Lands and Lives A Marquess with two Earls Beheaded Devonshire Kyldare and Surrey two Countesses Condemned to die Devonshire and Salisbury and the latter Executed Lords many as the Lord Darcy the Lord Hussey the Lord Montague the Lord Leonard Gray the Lord Dacers of the South the Lord Cromwel and six or seven Abbots Knights also in great number as five in one day with the Lords Hussey and Darcy and five in another day with the Earl of Kildare whose Uncles they were and besides them Sir Thomas Moor Sir Rice Griffith Sir Edward Nevel Sir John Nevel Sir Nicholas Carew Sir Adrian Fortescue and divers other Knights of great Account and then Gentlemen almost without end And all these within the space of 20 years of his Reign and in the time of peace and if we look upon but four or five years together of the Reign of this mans
of Kin also to King Henry the eighth of England yet could he never get to be restored but passed his time miserably partly in Banishment and partly in Prison until he died But it shall be best perhaps to end this short Narration with an Example or two out of England it self for that no where else have I read more remarkable accidents touching this point than in England but for brevity sake I shall only touch two or three that have happened since the Conquest for that I will go no higher though I might as appeareth by the Example of King Edwin and others neither will I begin to stand much upon the Example of King John though well also I might for that by his evil Government he made himself both so odious at home and contemptible abroad having lost Normandy Gascoin Guyen and all the rest in effect which the Crown of England had in France as first of all he was both Excommunicated and Deposed by the Sentence of the Pope at the Suit of his own people and was forced to make his peace by resigning his Crown into the hands of Pandulf the Pope's Legaâ—e as Polidor recounteth and afterwards falling back again to his old defects and naughty Government albeit by his promise to the Pope to go and make War against the Turks if he might be quiet at home and that his Kingdom should be perpetually tributary to the See of Rome he procured him to be of his side for a time and against the Barons yet that stayed not them to proceed to his Deprivation which they did effectuate first at Canterbury and after at London in the 18 th and last year of King John's Reign and meant also to have disinherited his Son Henry which was afterwards named King Henry the 3 d. and at that time a Child of Eight years old only and all this in punishment of the Father if he had lived and for that cause they called into England Lodowick Prince of France Son to King Philip the second and Father to St. Lewis the ninth and chose him for their King and did swear him Fealty with general consent in London in the year of our Lord 1216. And but that the Death of King John that presently ensued alter'd the whole course of that defignment and moved them to turn their purposes and accept of his Son Henry before matters were fully established for King Lodowick it was most likely that France and England would have been joyned by these means under a Crown But in the end as he said King Henry the third was admitted and he proved a very worthy King after so evil as had gone before him and had been Deposed which is a circumstance that you must always note in this Narration and he reigned more years than ever King in England did before him for he reigned full Fifty three years and left his Son and Heir Edward the first not inferiour to himself in Manhood and Virtue who reigned 34 years and left a Son named Edward the second who falling into the same or worse defects of Government than King John his Great-Grand-father had done was after 19 years reign Deposed also by Act of Parliament holden at London in the year 1326. and his Body adjudg'd to perpetual Imprisonment he being Prisoner at that present in the Castle of Wallingford whither divers both Bishops Lords and Knights of the Parliament were sent unto him to denounce the Sentence of the Realm against him viz. How they had deprived him and chosen Edward his Son in his stead For which act of choosing his Son he thanked them heartily and with many tears acknowledged his own unworthiness whereupon he was degraded his Name of King first taken from him and he appointed to be called Edward of Carnarvan from that hour forward and then his Crown and Ring were taken away and the Steward of his House brake the Staff of his Office in his presence and discharged his Servants of their Service and all other people of their Obedience or Allegiance towards him And towards his maintenance he had only a hundred Marks a year allowed for his Expences and then was he delivered also into the hands of certain particular Keepers who led him Prisoner from thence by divers other places using him with extreme indignity in the way until at last they took his Life from him in the Castle of Barklay and his Son Edward the third reigned in his place who if we respect either Valour Prowess length of Reign Acts of Chivalry or the multitude of famous Princes his Children left behind him was one of the noblest Kings that ever England had though he were chosen in the place of a very evil one as you have seen But what shall we say Is this worthiness which God giveth commonly to the Successors at these changes perpetual or certain by Descent No truly noâ— the example of one Prince's punishment maketh another to bewares for the next Successor after this noble Edwardâ— which was King Richard the second though he were not his Son but his Sons Son to wit Son and Heir to the renowned Black Prince of Walâ—s This Richard I say forgetting the miserable end of his Great-Grand-father for evil Government and the felicity and virtue of his Father and Grand-father for the contrary suffered himself to be abused and misled by evil Counsellors to the great hurt and disquiet of the Realm For which cause after he had reigned 22 years he was also Deposed by Act of Parliament holden in London in the year of our Lord 1399. and condemned to perpetual Imprisonment in the Castle of Pontefract where he was soon after put to death also and used as the other before had been And in this man's place by free Election was chosen for King the noble Knight Henry Duke of Lancaster who proved afterwards so notable a King as the World knoweth and was Father to King Henry the fifth commonly called the Alexander of England for that as Alexander the Great conquered the most part of Asia in the space of 9 or 10 years so did this Henry conquer France in less than the like time I might reckon also in this number of Princes Deposed for defect in Government though otherwise he were no evil man in life this King Henry the fourths Nephew I mean King Henry the sixth who after almost forty years Reign was Deposed and Imprisoned and put to death also together with his Son the Prince of Wales by Edward the fourth of the House of York and the sameâ— was confirmed by the Commons and especially by the people of London and afterwards also by publick Act of Parliament in respect not only of the Title which King Edward pretended but also and especially for that King Henry did suffer himself to be over-ruled by the Queen his Wife and had broken the Articles of Agreement made by the Parliament between
shall now begin to make more particular declaration taking my beginning from the Children of King Edward the third who were the causers of this fatal dissention CHAP. III. Of the succession of English Kings from King Edward the third unto our days with the particular causes of dissention between the Families of York and Lancaster more largely declared KIng Edward the third surnamed by the English the Victorious though he had many Children whereof some died without Issue which appertain not to us to treat of yet had he five Sons that left Issue behind them to wit Edward the eldest that was Prince of Wales surnamed the Black Prince Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son John of Gaunt so called for that he was born in that City that was the third Son and by his Wife was Duke of Lancaster and fourthly Edmond surnamed of Langley for that he was also born there and was Duke of York and last of all Thomas the fifth Son surnamed of Woodstock for the same reason of his birth and was Duke of Gloucester All these five Dukes being great Princes and Sons of one King left Issue behind them as shall be declared and for that the descendents of the third and fourth of these Sons to wit of the Dukes of Lancaster and York came afterward to strive who had best Title to Reign thereof it came that the controversie had his name of these two Families which for more distinction sake and the better to be known took upon them for their Ensigns a Rose of two different colours to wit the White Rose and the Red as all the World knoweth whereof the White served for York and the Red for Lancaster To begin then to shew the Issue of all these five Princes it is to be noted that the two elder of them to wit Prince Edward and his second Brother Leonel Duke of Clarence dyed both of them before King Edward their Father and left each of them an Heir for that Prince Edward left a Son named Richard who Succeeded in the Crown immediately after his Grand-father by the name of King Richard the second but afterward for his evil Government was deposed and dyed in prison without Issue and so was ended in him the Succession of the first Son of King Edward The second Son Leonel dying also before his Father left behind him one only Daughter and Heir named Philippa who was married to one Edmond Mortimer â—arl of March and he had by her a Son and Heir named Roger Mortimer which Roger had Issue two Sons named Edmond and Roger which dyed both without Children and one daughter named Anne Mortimer who was married unto Richard Plantagenet Earl of Cambridge second Son unto Edmond Langly Duke of York which Duke Edmond was fourth Son as hath been said unto King Edward the third and for that this Richard Plantagenet married the said Anne as hath been said hereby it came to pass that the House of York joyned two titles in one to wit that of Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son of King Edward the third and that of Edmond Langly Duke of York which was the fourth Son and albeit this Richard Plantagenet himself never came to be Duke of York for that he was put to death while his elder Brother lived by King Henry the fifth for a conspiracy discovered in Southampton against the said King when he was going over into France with his Army yet he left a Son behind him named also Richard who afterward came to be Duke of York by the death of his Uncle which Uncle was slain soon after in the Batteâ— of Ageâ—couâ—t in France and this Richard began first of all to prosecute openly his quarrel for the Title of the Crown against the House of Lancaster as a little afterward more in particuler shall be declared as also shall be shewed how that this 2 Richard Duke of York being slain also in the same quarrel left a Son named Edward Earl of March who after much trouble got to be King by the name of King Edward the 4 by the oppression and putting down of King Henry the 6 of the House of Lancaster and was the first King of the House of York whose Genealogy we shall lay down more largely afterwards in place convenient And now it followeth in order that we should speak of John of Gaunt the third Son but for that his descent is great I shall first shew the descent of the fifth and last Son of King Edward who was Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester and Earl of Buckingham that was put to death afterward or rather murthered wrongfully by order of his Nephew King Richard the second and he left only one daughter and Heir named Anne who was married to the Lord Stafford whose Family afterward in regard of this marriage came to be Dukes of Buckingham and were put down by King Richard the third and King Henry the eighth albeit some of the bloud and name do remain yet still in England And thus having brought to an end the Issue of three Sons of King Edward to wit of the first second and fifth and touched also somewhat of the fourth there resteth to prosecute more fully the Issues and descents of the third and fourth Sons to wit of John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster and of Edmond Langly Duke of York which are the Heads of these two Noble Families which thing I shall do in this place with all brevity and perspicuity possible beginning first with the House of Lancaster John of Gaunt third Son of King Edward being Duke of Lancaster by his Wife as hath been said had three Wives in all and by every one of them had issue though the Bishop of Ross in his great Latine Arbour of the Genealogies of the Kings of England Printed in Paris in the year 1580. assigneth but one Wife only to this John of Gaunt and consequently that all his Children were born of her which is a great and manifest errour and causeth great confusion in all the rest which in his Book of the Queen of Scots Title he buildeth hereon for that it being evident that only the first Wife was Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and John of Gaunt Duke thereof by her it followeth that the Children only that were born of her can pretend properly to the inheritance of that house and not others born of John of Gaunt by other wives as all the World will confess First then as I have said this John of Gaunt married Blanch Daughter and Heir of Henry Duke of Lancaster and had by her one Son only and two Daughters The Son was called Henry Earl first of Darby and after made Duke of Hereford by King Richard the second and after that came to be Duke also of Lancaster by the death of his Father and lastly was made King by the deposition of his Cousen German the said King
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
this of Portugal or by both though to determine this first and chief point who is the next and true Heir unto these foresaid King and Queen of Portugal the Laws of Portugal must needs be Judge and not those of England and so seeing that by these Lawâ— of Portugal the King of Spain is now adjudged for next Heir to the said Prince and is in possession of their Inheritance at this day I mean of the Crown of Portugal these men say that he must consequently Inherit also all other Rights Dignities and Prerogatives belonging to the foresaid Princes or to their Posterity And thus you see now how great diversity of Arguments and Objections is and may be alledged on different sides about this Affair whereby also is made manifest how doubtful and ambiguous a matter this point of English Succession is seeing that in one onely branch of the Pretenders which is in the House of Portugal alone there are so many difficulties as here hath been touched But now the common Objection against all these Titles and Titlers is that they are old and out of use and not to be brought in question again now especially seeing that both King Henry the VII and his Issue have enjoyed so long the Title of the House of Lancaster as it hath and secondly that these Titles do appertain unto Strangers whose Government may be dangerous many ways unto England and especially in that which toucheth the King of Spain who being so Great and Mighty a Monarch as he is may prejudice greatly the English Liberty and easily bring them into servitude if his pretence should be Favoured as by some it seemeth to be This is the Speech of many men in England and abroad at this day whereunto yet some others do answer that as concerning the first Objection of the oldness of the Pretence and Title it hath shewed before that by Law no Title to a Kingdom dyeth ever but may take place whensoever the Party to whom it belongeth is able to avouch it and get possession and as for this pretence of the Line of Portugal they say that it hath not such great age but that very well it may shew it self and be had in consideration especially at this Time wâ—â—n now the Issue Male of King Henry the VII is ended and that of Necessity we must return to have consideration of the Issue of his Daughters before which Daughters good Reason say these men is it that the Issue of Lady Philippa Queen of Portugal should be admitted for that albeit we would have that respect to the Issues Male of John Earl of Somerset as to prefer it or suffer it to enjoy the Crown before the Issue of Queen Philippa and so they say it seemeth that it was for that King Henry the VII was Crowned King his Mother being alive which yet by ordinary course of Succession should have gone before him yet say they it is no reason that the Issue-Female of John of Somerset or of King Henry the VII should be preferred before the Issue-Male of the said Queen Philippa Moreover they say that the House of Clarence and Hutnington do pretend a Title more old and stale at this day than this of Portugal for that they pretend from George Duke of Clarence that never had the Crown and these of Portugal pretend to be next Heir to King Henry the VI. that did wear the Crown of England for 40. Years together after whose death if King Alfonsus of Portugal who was then old and wearied with evil success of Wars had been so able to prefer and follow his Title as some of that House be at this day he would never have suffered the House of York to have entred nor King Henry the VII to have enjoyed it after them by the Title of Lancaster which Title yet of Lancaster say these men King Henry the VII could not have in himself any way whether we respect Queen Philippa or John of Somerset for by Queen Philippa they of Portugal were evidently before him and by way of John of Somerset the Countess his Mother was as clearly before him neither could he have any Title as yet by the House of Yâ—rk for that he was not yet married to the Daughter of King Edward so as his Crowning in the Field and whole entrance to the Kingdom was without any actual Title at all but only the good will of the People as these men do hold To the other Objection of 14. Princes and strange Government that may come to England by these pretences of the Princes of Portugal divers men do answer diversly for some do grant that it may be so that by this means England may come to be under Foreign Kings and that no hurt or inconvenience at all would ensue thereof to England but rather much Good and Commodity but other that like not well of this assertion do say further that if these Foreign pretences should take place yet that all matters might be so compounded that albeit the Prince himself which is to Rule should be Foreign born which they take to be no Inconvenience yet that his Forces and Dependance should be only of the English for that he should not bring in any strange Powers into the Land no more than did King Stephen or King Henry the II. that were born in France or than did King Philip of Spain in Queen Marys days or as it is thought Monsiâ—ur of France should have done if he had married her Majesty that now is as once it was supposed he should To this said one of the Company and is it possible that any man should be of opinion that Foreign Government in what manner or kind soever it be should not be inconvenient and hurtfull to England where the People are wholly bent against it you remember quoth he as concerning the last two Examples that you have alledged what Tumult and stir there was raised by some kind of Men about the coming in of King Philip and what there was like to have been about the entrance of Monsieur if that purpose had gone forward I remember well said the Lawyer and these men that are of this opinion will say to this that it was but a Popular Mutiny without Reason or any good Ground at all and only raised by some crafty Heads that misliked the Religion of the Princes that were to enter and for some other drifts of their own but not of any sound Reason or Argument of State which these men think rather to be of their side and in good sooth they alledge so many Arguments for their Opinion that if you should hear them you would say it were hard to judge which Opinion had most Truth but they are too long for this place and so said he I shall make an end of the matter that I have in hand and leave this point for others to discuss With this the whole Company shewed marvellous great desire to know
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