Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
death_n woman_n year_n youth_n 45 3 7.5633 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A56468 A conference about the next succession to the crown of England divided into two parts : the first containeth the discourse of a civil lawyer, how and in what manner propinquity of bloud is to be preferred : the second containeth the speech of a temporal lawyer about the particular titles of all such as do, or may, pretend (within England or without) to the next succession : whereunto is also added a new and perfect arbor and genealogy of the descents of all the kings and princes of England, from the Conquest to the present day, whereby each mans pretence is made more plain ... / published by R. Doleman. Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.; Allen, William, 1532-1594.; Englefield, Francis, Sir, d. 1596? 1681 (1681) Wing P568; ESTC R36629 283,893 409

There are 6 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

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 Edwar● 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 Hardica●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
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
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 ●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 propinqui●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 ●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 Wi●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 ●o●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
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 Agenc●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 w●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 S●●● 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
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 ●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 l●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 term●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 des●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 Yo●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 th●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