Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	word_n	year_n	young_a	191	3	5.8982	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B01413	Answers for the Earl of Argyle and Laird of Innes, to the representation printed by the Duke of Gordon.		1700 (1700)	Wing A3466A; ESTC R172389	4,156	2

him that Debt for the Marquess of Huntly and included it in the foresaid Sum contained in the Printed Minut. The Representation to take off the Earl of Argyles just Claim of Debt against the Family of Huntly upon the foresaid Printed Minut alleadges things so inconsistent that it is almost a shame to repeat them For first it says that the Marquess of Argyle had that Kindness for his Nevoy the Marquess of Huntly as to cover Huntlys Possession in regard his Father had been Forefaulted from the English Usurpers and yet immediately it subjoyns That the Marques of Argyle hereby geting access to Huntlies Charter Christ had the Opportunity to make use of retired Bonds and out of the product of Huntlys Estate to compone Huntlyes Debts at his pleasure than which there can be nothing more ungrate Unreasonable and absurd 2. It says that the Marquess of Argyle was highly in Favours with the English whereas all Men that remember these times know that the Marquess of Argyle was the Man of his Quality in Scotland that was most suspected by the English And that instead of Favours he could never so much as obtain Justice of them and if he had been so much in Favour with the English and had been so ill intended towards the Family of Huntly what should have hindered him to have taken Possession of the whole Estate of Huntly either by vertue of the Forfeiture or by vertue of Beatouns expired Apprysing whereof he had then Right in his Reison But 3. The best account that can be given for the Marquess of Argyles Vindication in Relation to the Estate of Huntly are the Marquess of Argyl his own Words when Arraigned before the Parliament 1661 which are these For the Estate of Huntly I had nothing in it but for my own absolutly Necessary Relief and was ever most willing to part with any Interest I had therein getting his Friends who trofess much Zeal for the standing of the Family Ingadged for Warrandice to me of any Portion that should fall to me for my Satisfaction and to Evidence that I was no means to harm the Family I stood with my Rights betwixt all Fines and Forfeitures and Accompted for any thing I could receive and to manifest yet farder that the burden of that Family was not from any extrinsick Cause of themselves I have under the old Marquess's own Hand and his Sons George Lord Gordon who was a very worthy Young Nobleman the just Inventary of their Debts amounting to about Ten Hundreth Thousand Merks in the Year 1640. These being the Words of the Marquess having his Death certainly in his View will no doubt be much better believed then this Groundless Representation 4. How unjust then the Representation is to alleadge that the Earl of Argyle hath nothing to Claim of the Estate of Huntly and that he should content himself with the Title of Earl and the Gift of 15000 lib. yearly which he got out of his own Estate upon the Marquess of Argyls Forfeiture and let the remainder of his Estate go for the Payment of Huntlys Debt all Men may Judge The Duke of Gordon and the Earl of Aboyne possess no less then 5000 lib. sterl yearly free of Debt by vertue of the Marquess of Argyls Forfeiture And yet this Paper has the Confidence to say that the Earl of Argyle should content himself with 15000 Lib. Scots of his Grand-Fathers Estate and let the rest go for the Payment of the Marquess of Huntlys Debt who ever heard the like The Representation ends with some Reflections upon the Printed Minut 1653 stating the Debt due by the House of Huntly to Argyle And 1. It alleadges that the Writer thereof is not designed but the Writer is Named and may still be Designed besides that the Paper is Subscribed by both Parties and many honourable Persons 2. It alleadges That Marquess Lewis was not Infeft as Heir to his Father nor could he indeed be Infeft because his Father was then Forefaulted but what could the Marquess of Argyle do more for the Marquess of Huntly than to keep him in the Possession of his Estate notwithstanding of his Fathers Forfeiture and fairly to state the Debt due to him by the Marquess of Huntly when he might have Possest the Estate Irredeemably without either Compt or Reckoning 3 The Representation again alleadges the Marquess of Argyles Power with the English and over the Marquess of Huntly his Nevoy and that he possest the whole Estate of Huntly for nine years except only 7000 Merks a year which are all three false For the Marquess of Argyle as hath been said was in no Favour with the English nor had the Marquess of Huntly and dependence upon him but was a Man for himself and behaved as absolutely as any of his Predecessors And all the Possession that the Marquess of Argyle obtained was to have the Chamberlands obliged to pay him his Annualrents as the Printed Minut bears and which Annualrents he never got So that upon the whole this Representation for the Duke of Gordon is in effect much more against him