no Jurisdiction but by Usurpation of so Temporal a Right as Marriage before this Statute let any who thinks he can see Nine Miles into a Milstone once more look into the Statute of Merton before recited and try whether he can screw out of it any word giving the Bishops either a Jurisdiction of Marriage or general Bastardy or that this Statute ever forged so rude a Romish Tool as the two edged Sword of general and special Bastardy to divide the living Child or tear it in peices between the Bishop and the Temporal Judg or how it was then consistent with a Legale Judicium parium to expose a Child no Alien but the King 's Native Subject to be tried for all he had by a then Foraign Ecclesiastical Law and a Judg a sworn Canonical Subject to a Foraign Pope or that the wisdom of that Parliament intended to coin a Chimera of a Distinction without a difference of general and special Bastardy which neither they themselves understood nor any Lawyers which write to this day give any sensibly Interpretation or agree amongst themselves concerning it or that they who made the Statute to oppose the Bishops Jurisdiction of Marriage should create a Notion of general Bastardy which le Scrope says was not in Esse before to give them a new Jurisdiction which was to change the Laws of England which they positively refuse in the Statute it self to change Object 4 No Similitude of fetching the Laws of Athens to Rome and bringing the Romish Laws to England It is further alledged by Coke lib. 5.1 part 9. That as the Romans fetching divers Laws from Athens yet being approved and allowed by the State there they were called Jus Civile Romanorum And as the Normans borrowing all or most of their Laws from England yet baptized them by the name of the Laws and Customs of Normandy So albeit the Kings of England derived their Ecclesiastical Laws from others yet so many as were approved and allowed hereby and with general consent are aptly and rightly called the King's Ecclesiastical Laws o. England To which is answer'd That there is no similitude between making or changing the Laws of the Athenians which were Foraign Laws to become the Laws of the Romans and the making or changing either the Foraign Papal or native Provincial Canons or Ecclesiastical Laws into the King's Ecclesiastical Laws of England For First The Athenian Laws before they were made Denizons of Rome were not admitted in cumulo but Articulated and every Article examined one by one by the Decem viri or Ten Men as our usurped Ecclesiastical Laws were appointed to have been done by the Statute of 25 Hen. 8.19 by the Two and Thirty Men and likewise in time of Edward the Sixth by others but neither succeeded before the same was received for a Roman Law Secondly Such Athenian Laws as were pickt or garbled from the rest were by the Authority of the Legislative Power of Rome both Senate and People caused to be writ in Twelve Tables and inacted to be the Laws of Rome but in England there was never by Authority any Articulation selecting or garbling of Canon Laws effected nor the same reduced into Tables Written or Printed by any Act of Parliament Ecclesiastical Laws in an unknown Language Thirdly The selected Athenian Laws were written in the Roman Language to be understood by the People before they would be received as Roman Laws but there is no such thing in the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Holy-Church concerning Marriage or any thing else but they all still remain in the Language of the Beast and can be neither call'd the Laws of the Church which by the Scripture are forbidden to be spoke in an unknown tongue as appears 1 Cor. 14.19 It is said In the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding that by my voice I might teach others also then ten thousand words in an unknown tongue It is as utterly unlawful therefore to make that a Law of the Church or an Ecclesiastical Law of Marriage which is in the unknown Language of Latin as it had been to have made any form of Prayer taken from the Romish Church though the Pater Noster it self the form of Prayer of the Church of England while it was in Latin for the Minister would then have been a Barbarian to the English man and the English-man a Barbarian to him and it is as bad for the poor English-man for his Law-sutes in Latin for a Wife in the Court of Arches and other Ecclesiastical Courts as it would be if his Prayers were again in Latin in the Church For though he pay his Lawyers dear to plead his Cause there he cannot understand for his Money whether they call him and his Wife Rogue and Whore or honest People or whether the Judg by his Sentence will give him his Wife or take her from him but by the implicit Faith of an Interpreter as let any one look on the Sentence of Divorce in Kennes Case Coke lib. 7.42 E. he may understand or not understand the same Ecclesiastical Laws are not the Laws of the Land Fourthly The Athenian Laws were not obtruded on the Romans by Conquest of their Bodies by the Temporal Sword or their Souls by the Spiritual Sword of Excommunication but the Ecclesiastical Laws of Marriage have been obtruded on England ever since the Conquest by the superstitious Terrors or actual force of Excommunication either Papal or Episcopal and never by consent in Parliament The suffering of an oppression therefore is no consent nor an abuse against Law an Use Custom or Law neither can a wicked Oppression Use Custom or Law in name only be turned into a Law of England except by consent in Parliament or other humane Power besides it is by the very before recited Statute of Merton declared That the Laws of the Church are not the Laws of England for when the Bishop quarrel'd that the Law of England as to Marriage was not according to the Law of the Church and would have had them changed into the Law of the Church the Earls and Barons with one voice answer'd We will not change the Laws of England Whereby it 's plain the Laws of England and Laws of the Church are opposite Laws and not the same and this is confessed by Coke himself in the exposition of his Statute of Merton 2 part Inst fol. 98. where he saith Here our Common Laws are aptly and properly called the Laws of England because they are appropriated to this Kingdom of England as most apt and fit for the Government thereof and have no dependence upon any Foraign Law whatsoever no not on the Civil or Canon Law other then in Cases allowed by the Laws of England and therefore he saith the Poet spake truly hereof Et penitus toto divisos orbe Britannos So as the Law of England is proprium quarto modo to the Kingdom of England therefore Foraign Precedents are
Dioccss of L. the Sixth day of August Anno Dom. 1606 Matrimony true pure and lawful Per verba de praesenti according to the form and rites of the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England between the said A. B. and C. D. was Solemnized by one Mr. A. V. Clerk in the presence of J. J. W. B. W. W. R. M. Witnesses in this part by the said Bishop examin'd and sworn and of other Witnesses then present the said Parties A. B. and C. D. his Wife being of lawful Age and from all other Matrimonial Contracts free clear and clean as the Witnesses so sworn and examined believe This is the Form of Certificate which carries the best Circumstances and Face of a Marriage which can be put on any But the Bishop will give his Certificate as full of a true pure and lawful Matrimony to Coke's Woman with the Adulterous great Belly who lays it down the next day though no Witness will compurgate from other Contracts and transubstantiate as well the Child Adulterous as lawfully begot to be Child of the Husband yet is not this Certificate neither free from fiction and falsity contrary to the Law of God for it is already shewn That it is impossible to make a verbal Contract per verba de praesenti praeterito or futuro matrimonio and that Matrimony cannot be before a Mother nor a Mother before Conception of a Child and that 't is impossible to make a Ceremonial Law of Marriage either of the Church of England or Rome to be the Moral Law of Marriage instituted by God and besides if there were a lawful Marriage there can be no Sequel or Ergo infer'd That the Adulterous Child of the Woman is lawfully begot because the Marriage was lawful or ought to be Successor to the Husband 's Goods because born of the Wife for there can be properly no Adultery nor Adulterous Issue born but within lawful Marriage But Logician beware the Bishop's Certificate and a Law of Transubstantiation alter the case if thy profane Reason will dispute Faith or Episcopal Infallibility in Marriage Filiation and Succession thou wilt be Excommunicated The good Woman hath the same advantage whether she go from her Husband's House or stay there for if the good-man leave her at home and march abroad himself a Soldiering or Merchandizing if still it be within the four Seas and his Stock increase and multiply at home the while more then abroad he must not be so ill natur'd as not to bear the charg of his better Factress then himself During the late Civil Wars A Souldier finding his Wives Children transubstantiated into his I was credibly informed of a Soldier who left his Wife at home with one Child and was for divers Years so long out in Service that before he returned home again his Wife had two more to increase his number at length he returned home to the Town where he dwelt and the Neighbours as soon as they understood it went in shew to welcome him home but withal to see how he would like the increase of his Children in his absence where after they had sat a while he appeared very kind to his Wife and very fond of his Child which he had left at home at his departure supposing the other to have been some Children of the Neighbours who were come in to play with his 'till a while after seeing those Children by his Fire-side to draw closer to his Wife then strangers use to do he asked Whose the Children were the Wife and answer'd him Thine whereat he was much amazed and demanded how that could be seeing he had not been at home so many Years The Wife replyed thou might'st have stayed at home then and got them thy self if thou would'st so there being no other Answer to be got the poor man was glad to take up this new Bag and Baggage when he thought to have rested For the fiction of Legitimation dared give the Truth of the Soldier the Lie to his face yet he knew not whom to send a Challenge or a Duel to In no better case had he been had he in the Service of his King and Country lost his life in a fight at Sea if within the four Seas what he had got with his own Blood must have gone to an Adulterous Blood at the pleasure of his Wife and the Certificate of the Bishop Of the Law of Intails on Marriage and the mischiefs insuing by them Law of Intails causeth Adulteries and disinherits true Heirs It is before shewen how mischievously the true Heirs are dis-inherited and destroyed by Intails to two Bodies and by Littleton Coke and the Bishops fictions on the same who in despight of Truth Religion Sence and Reason God and Nature will have the Adulterous issue of the Woman preferred before the true and lawful Children of the Man in Succession to the Man's inheritance I shall likewise here touch some other few but fatal mischiefs which the Chains and Fetters of Estates by Intails to two Bodies on Marriages whether these Intails are made by the Pontificial or Temporal Laws do cause for it is to be noted that the Laws of Theodora and the Popes which Enact That no Children shall be capable of Succession to the Father but where the Father and Mother were contracted by a Priest in a Temple is an Intailing of the Inheritance of the Man to the Heirs of the Body of the Woman and an excluding of the Heirs of the Man if she prove adulterous So there cannot properly be said to be any Fee-simple in England No Fee-simple in England for Fee-simple it self is by the Popish Law Intailed to the Heirs of the Body of the Woman begotten beget them who will and the Priest who would not therefore be married himself to a Wife lest she should put a cheat on him and bring forth a yâ—ung Lay-man but take a Curtezan put cunningly the Fee-simple cheat on the simple Lay-man and his Fils de prestre too by making a Law That none should be his Heirs unless begotten on the Body of such Woman as he should give him in a Temple Littleton deceived in Fee-simple So Littleton in his Chapter of Fee-simple and his Commentator on him understood not the words his Heirs for every Fee-simple where a Woman is married by a Priest in a Temple is to go to her Heirs of her Body begotten and not to his and let her have as many Heirs as she will begotten by the Adulterer the Husband's Land shall go to her Heirs but let the Husband who is perhaps turned off by the Wife get as many as he will by another Woman none of those shall be his Heirs For which reason in favour of the true and natural Children and that the Father might have power by Act executed in his Life-time to provide for his own especially where he found his Wives Adulterous as Britton fol. 122. saith That the Forms of Deeds of Feoffment
cùm vix esset dare causam quin ratione peccati possit deferri ad Ecclesiam Object 3 Stat. Merton gives them no Jurisdiction It 's alledged That it appears by the Statute of Merton that Henry the Third writ in his time to the Bishop to certifie Marriage and Bastardy First It is to be understood therefore that in the time of Pope Alexander the Third Anno Dom. 1160. which was Anno 6. H. 2. in whose time all Matrimonial Causes beonged to the King's Courts This Constitution was made That Children born before Solemnization of Matrimony where Matrimony followed should be as Legitimate to inherit to their Ancestors as those that were born after Matrimony It is likewise further to be known that King John the Father of Henry the Third who made this Statute of Merton following was by the then Pope Innocent Excommunicated King John Excommunicated as likewise at the same time was the Emperor Otho and the whole Kingdom of England Interdicted and so remained for the space of Six Years Three Months and Fourteen Days during all which time there was no Church open for Marriages or Burials but the poorer People were buried like Dogs in Ditches and where they married God knows Through which King John was driven to such distress by his own Bishops and Barons and the French assisting the Pope against him that he was forced before he could get to be released of this Excommunication to pay the Pope vast Sums of Money and to lay down his Crown and Scepter Mantle Sword and Ring the Ensigns of his Royalty at the feet of Pandolphus the Pope's Legat and submit himself to the Mercy and Judgment of the Church Two Days some write Six it was before the Legat restored him to his Crown which he likewise received again on no better Terms then to hold the Kingdom of England and Lordship of Ireland from the See of Rome at the Annual Tribute of a Thousand Marks Silver and the Excommunication was not to be taken off but deferred till further and full satisfaction was made to the Clergy which was not done till Two Years after The Bishops being hereby arrived at so great an height of their Tyrannical Power over this King The Bishops usurped the exercise of Ecclesistical Laws by force over their Kings As that when the King having obtained absolution had gather'd a great Army to have been revenged on the French King the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury told him 't was against his Oath at his Absolution and the King in a great passion reply'd He would not defer the Business for his pleasure seeing Lay-judgment appertained not to him the Arch-Bishop presumed to threaten his native Soveraign that unless he desisted he would Excommunicate him Note therefore That in the time of H. 3. who was the Eldest Son of King John the Bishops continued to assume the Power of Lay-judments as well in Marriages as they did of shutting up of Churches in which they were made from the Pope to whom they had inforced King John to surrender his Crown and not from the King 's Writ as that Statute of Merton shews rather a proud Renunciation and scorn to answer the King 's Writ concerning Marriage then any use permitted by them to the King of the same unless he would as his Father had done lay down again his Crown to them and have Marriage judg'd according to the Law of the Pope for otherwise they tell him plainly They neither will nor can answer his Writ as appears by the Statute it self the words whereof follow 20 H. 3. Cap. 9. To the King 's Writ of Bastardy Whether one being born before Matrimony may Inherit in like manner as he that is born after Matrimony All the Bishops answer'd That they would not nor could not answer to it because it was directly against the common Order of the Church that is meant the Romish Church And all the Bishops instanted the Lords that they would consent that all such as were born afore Matrimony should be Legitimated as well as they who were born within Matrimony as to the succession of Inheritance for so much as the Church accepteth such for Legitimate And all the Earls and Barons answer'd with one voice That they would not change the Laws of the Realm which hitherto have been used and approved Coke 2 part Inst 97. It is said Though the Bishops are Spiritual Persons yet in case of general Bastardy when the King writes to them to certifie who is lawful Heir to any Lands or other Inheritances they ought to certifie according to the Law and Custom of England and not according to the Roman Canons and Constitutions yet if they do make their Certificate according to the Canon Law No remedy against Bishops making Certificates contrary to the King's Laws General Bastardy uâ—urped by Bishops not given them by Law and not the Law of the Land there appears no Remedy unless such a one as is worse then the Disease Sir Galfred le Scrope Cheif Justice saith Before this Statute of Merton the Party pleaded not general Bastardy but that he was born out of Espousals and the Bishop ought to certifie whether he were born before Espousals or not and according to that Certificate to proceed to Judgment according to the Law of the Land And the Prelates answered That they could not nor would not to this Writ answer and therefore ever since special Bastardy viz. that the Defendant c. was born before Espousals hath been Try'd in the King's Courts and general Bastardy in the Bishops Court and herewith agree out old Books and the constant Opinion of the Judges ever since Coke 2 part Inst 99. It being before granted That the Law of England cannot be changed but by an Act of Parliament and Magna Charta being before made and being a Declaration of the ancient Common Law First That no Freeman was to be put out of his Free-hold or Inheritance but per legale Judicium parium and there being no cause of its own Nature more Temporal or more concerning Succession to Temporal Inheritance then Marriage It was contrary to Magna Charta and the Common Law to judg the Fact of it by any other Judges then Juries and the Law of it by any other Judges then those of Temporal Courts and though the Pope and Bishops in those Superstitious times forced the Kings many times as they did King John to yeild his Crown and the Subjects to yeild their Marriages and other Temporal Rights to their Arbitrary and Saleable Sentence for fear of Excommunication yet doth not this any way prove that the Jurisdiction of Marriage was ever granted them by any Law or Act of Parliament or could be without it were contrary to a known Common Law and Act of Parliament which expressly gave the trial of Temporal Rights and Inheritances to a Legale Judicium parium and not to any Ecclesiastical Judges or Laws Now therefore it being clear they had
of Laws but that he might get the more into his Snares and so have thereby the more plentiful incomes and fines for Dispensations and Condemnations And this take for the up-shot of this Dance for as the old Comedies used to end in Weddings so all the enterprises of the Pope ended in money Study of Ecclesiastical Laws corrupts Protestants Divers Weights and Measures Ad aliud Tribunal aliud Exmen alias Leges Circuit Subornation Perjury Interfering of Courts 4. The study of the Popish Canons corrupts the choicest Protestant Wits in their Education with Popish principles in which rest the whole hopes of the gains of their profession 5. They introduce divers Weights and divers Measures of justice in the same people 6. They compel the Subjects ad aliud Tribunal then Caesars Judgment Seat ad aliud examen then per legem Terrae ad aliud judicium then legale judicium parium 7. They cause endless Circuits of Action Delays and Costs Subornation and Perjury of Witnesses and grind the people between two Mill-stones of interfering Jurisdictions as appears in the Statute following The Recital of the Statute 9 H. 6.11 following concerning the contention of the Heirs of Edmund Earl of Kent in Parliament relating to a Marriage without a Priest and Temple ITem Whereas by a supplication delivered in this present Parliament by the Commons of the same it was declared by Margaret Dutchess of Clarence Joan Dutchess of York Sisters and amongst others Heirs to Edmund Earl of Kent Richard Duke of York Richard Earl of Salisbury and Alice his Wife Ralph Earl of Westmorland John Lord of Typtost and of Powis and Joyce his Wife and Henry Gray Cousins and other of the Heirs of the said Edmund late Earl as in the same supplication is supposed That is to say the said Duke Son to Ann Daughter of Eleanor another of the Sisters of the said Edmund the said Alice Daughter to Eleanor another Sister of the said Edmund the said Ralph Son to Elizabeth another Sister of the said Edmund the said Joyce Daughter to the said Eleanor Mother of Ann and the said Henry Gray Son to Joan Daughter of the same Eleanor That whereas Eleanor Wife to James Lord Audley pretending calling and affirming her self Daughter and Heir to the said Edmund late Earl of Kent and begotten and born in Marriage pretensed had betwixt him and Constance late Wife of Thomas Lord Dispenser whereby the said supplication is supposed That the said Eleanor Wife to the said James is Bastard and never was any Marriage made had nor solemnized betwixt the said Edmund and Constance but the said Edmund by the Ordinance Will and Agreement of King Henry the Fourth Grand-Father to our Lord the King that now is after great notable and long Ambassage had and sent to the Duke of Millain for a Marriage to be had betwixt the said Edmund and Luce Sister to the said Duke of Millain did take to Wife and openly and solemnly Married the said Luce at London The said Constance then living and being there present not claiming the said Edmund to be her Husband nor any other Dower of his Lands after his decease which Marriage betwixt the said Edmund and Luce so had and solemnized continued without any interruption of the said Constance or of any other during the life of the said Edmund as divers Lords and other credible and notable persons of the said Realm do well remember And how after the decease of the said Edmund the said Luce was endowed of his Lands as his Lawful Wife continuing thereof her Estate peaceably all her life Nevertheless the said Eleanor the Wife of James upon great subtilty and process imagined Privy-labour and other means and coloured ways to the intent that she ought to be certified Mulier by some Ordinary in case that Bastardy should be alledged in her person hath brought as it is said in examination before certain Iudges in the Spiritual-Court not informed nor having knowledge of the said Subtilty Imagined Process Privy-labour and coloured ways certain suborned proofs and persons of her Assent and Covin deposing for her That the said Eleanor the Wife of James was begotten within Marriage had and solemnized betwixt the said Edmund and Constance The said Dutchess the Duke of York and Earl of Salisbury and Alice Earl of Westmerland John Lord of Typtost Joyce and Henry nor any of them thereof warned nor knowing untill long time after the deposition so made whereof the said suppliants do fear them to be grieved and impeached of their Inheritance had by the said Edmund by another subtilty and labour in the Temporal Law to be practised and wrought by the said Lord Audley and Eleanor his Wife As if they will commence any Action against any persons of their own assent and covin or otherwise will cause such persons of such assent and covin to pursue an Action against them as is supposed they intend to do in which action by the covin and assent aforesaid Bastardy ought to be alledged in the person of the said Eleanor Wife of James and thereupon by the assent and covin an Issue is to be taken and a Writ to be sent to some Ordinary where it please them not advertised of the said subtilty assent and covin to certifie if the said Eleanor the Wife of James be Mulier or not before which ordinary the same Eleanor Wife of James will alledge and prove her self Mulier by the said depositions of the said suborned Witnesses And then the party reputed as adversary against the Lord of Audley and Eleanor his Wife in the said action taken or to be taken by assent and covin aforesaid will alledge no proof nor matter nor make any defence before the Ordinary against the same Lord Audley and Eleanor his Wife but suffer the matter before the said Ordinary to proceed according to the meaning of the said Lord Audley and Eleanor his Wife So that it is very likely that the same Ordinary will certifie the said Eleanor the Wife of James Mulier which Certificate so had and made ought by the Law of England to disherit the said Dutchess Duke of York Earl of Salisbury Earl of Westmerland John Lord of Typtost Joyce and Henry and their Issue forever of the whole Inheritance aforesaid Whereupon the premises tenderly considered and to Eschew such subtil disherisons as well in the said Case as in other Cases like in time to come By the Advice and Assent of all the Lords Spiritual and also at the special Request of the said Commons in this present Parliament assembled It is Ordained and Established by Authority of this Parliament That if the said Eleanor the Wife of James be certified Mulier in any Court before this time that no manner of Certificate heretofore made for the said Eleanor Wife of James shall in anywise put to prejudice indamage nor conclude any person or persons but him or his Heirs that was party to the Plea And that from
it doth dot null a Protestant's which is not made according to that Form That it doth not null a Papist's Marriage appears by the Act 3 Jac. 5. where a Papist is prohibited to be Married otherwise then in some open Church or Chappel by a Minister Lawfully authorized upon pain that the Man shall lose to be Tenant by the curtesie and the Woman her Dower Widows estate and Frank Bank or if the Woman hath no Land whereof the Man may be Tenant by the curtesie then the Man is to lose a hundred pounds So in case of a Papist nothing ought to be exacted for Non-conformity in Marriage but the express penalties nor can the Marriage of a Papist though not according to the Act be made null or the Children thereby illegitimate why then should a Protestant's 2. Because the Council of Trent which made the Canon That all Marriages should be null and void except contracted before two Witnesses and a Priest in a Temple is a Forein Jurisdiction and the Canon was made after the abolishing all Forein Jurisdiction the same ought not therefore be admitted to null any Marriage in England or illegitimate any Child 3. This is confessed by a Learned Civilian and Canonist of our own belonging to the Ecclesiastaical Court Swimburn Swimburn of Wills and Test 1 part 34. Who there saith That an unsolemn Marriage or not having Canonical Ceremonies is not therefore no Marriage because it is unsolemn the Banes perhaps not being asked or the Marriage not Celebrated in the face of the Church but privately in a Chamber or some other Rite or Ceremony omitted but is nevertheless a true Marriage And in the Margent he adds to this effect Insolemnitas autem est defectus juris civilis non juris naturae nam illa requisita de quibus in C. cumin hibitio de Cland. despon sext non esse deforma substantia matrimonii Legitimationis prolis sed de solennitate tantùm ipsius decore introducta Post Theolog. Canonistas prodidit Granis Consul Civil 168. hanc op communi calculo receptam dicit Jo. Lub Mascard de probat verb. filius conclu 798. n. 8. licet hodie per Concil Tridentin hujusmodi matrimonia fiunt irrita Nos tamen sequimur antiquum jus commune tanquam non mutatum Insolemnity is a defect in the Civil Law and not of the Law of Nature for those requisites of 1 C. inhibitio de clan despon Granis Concil Civil 168. hath delivered after many Divines and Canonists the same not to be of the substance of Matrimony and Legitimation of Children but only introduced for their greater Ornament And Jo. Lub and Mascard de Probat verb. Filius 798. say likewise The same opinion to be received by general approbation and though of late the Council of Trent hath made such Marriages void yet they follow the ancient Common Law as not changed Whereby it appears that the Canon of the Council of Trent to make Marriages not according to the Romish Ceremonies is rejected in many other places and much more in England where all Forein Jurisdiction is abolished and there is no other Law of England if that of the Council of Trent is excluded which makes any Marriage of Protestant or Papist void or illegitimates the Children If the Marriage is not therefore void it is valid and hath all the rights of a valid Marriage and the Children all the rights of Legitimate Children 4. It is already in part and will hereafter be further shewen That carnal knowledge and not Ceremonies are Marriage and that the same and the birth of a Child and not Ceremonies make Matrimony and that both Marriage and Filiation are impossible to be proved by any Witnesses except the Parents admit Therefore if the Canon of Trent were confirmed by Act of Parliament or a thousand Acts of Parliament yet can they not make that Matrimony and Filiation by a Ceremonial Law of Man void which is established by the Moral Law of God as will be further shewen under the Title of Ceremonial Law and Law of God Of the Custom of Super-alimentary gifts in consideration of carnal knowledge between a Man and Woman both before and after Marriage Portions of Daughters Nuptial love is like the gift of God impossible to be bought for mony Cant. 8.7 If a Man would give all the substance of his House for Love it would utterly be contemned Solon the Athenian Law giver ordained That Wives should not bring their Husbands above three Gowns and some other movables of small value Lycurgus instituted That Virgins should be married without Portions 1. That none might remain unmarried for their poverty 2. That none should be taken for their riches but their vertues Plut. In Poland Fathers give no more with their Daughters then their Wedding Clothes And the truth is as to Fahers it comes all to one whether they give Portions with Daughters or none if there were such a Law for if A. and B. have each of them three Sons and three Daughters and A give Portions with his Daughters to the Sons of B and B give back again those Portions with his Daughters to the Sons of A there is nothing got on either side but the trouble and hazard of tumbiing in and out the money and the vexation of Lawyers with their foul Fines and crabbed Concords to do and undo all again like Juglers knots The Venetians had a Law none should give above fifteen hundred Crowns others say sixteen hundred Duckats with a Daughter yet are they very rich Bodin cries out against high Portions and saith That by the Antient custom of Marseilles it was not lawful to give above an hundred Crowns with a Daughter and five Crowns in Apparel And a Law was made by Charles the Ninth forbidding to give a Daughter above a thousand pounds sterling And yet the Ordinance of Charles the fifth doth give no more unto the Daughters of the House of France and though Elizabeth of France Daughter to Philip the Fair was married to the King of England yet had she but Twelve hundred pounds sterling to her Dowry Some will say it was very much considering the scarcity of Gold and Silver in those days but the difference is likewise very great betwixt a thousand pounds and four hundred thousand Crowns It is true she was the goodliest Princess of her Age and of the greatest House that was at that day Henry the Eighth gave for Portions to his Daughters Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth but Ten thousand pounds a piece And if we will seek higher we shall find that in the Law of God the Marriage of a Daughter was taxed but a fifty Skekells which makes at most but four pounds sterling of our money Gifts by Men to Women Amongst the Jews there appeared almost no other distinction in the Scripture between a Wife and a Whore but one took hire and the other none and indeed if there were no
in the said Chancery-Orders Printed 1669. presumes to do in the Court of Conscience what was never heard of to be done in the Courts of Turks Infidels or the most Barbarous Judicatories in the World for he is not ashamed publickly to give License to Cursitors and their Clerks to commit Crimen Falsi which we call Forgery by Antedating Writs taking them out of Returns past or of a former Term by reason of which Forgery of Writs and Forgery of Returns Antedated Capiases Proclamations Exigends and Outlawries Antedated have been likewise Forged and Thousands of Poor men unjustly cast in Goals and miserably undone without any Summons or Hearing and these are likewise the damnable effects of the Chancellours Writs by which as by others the Plaintiffs so here the Defendants are destroyed without Hearing and certainly these Crimes of Antedating and Forgery of Judicial Acts though here Licensed by Orders of Chancellors and Protected by Courts by not Licensing Averments against them are by the Civil Law and Laws of Scotland and of many other Nations both of these and Instruments Death and even by our own the imbeselling of a Record by a Clerk and Counterfeiting of Fines is Felony and if the second time so is the Forgery of Deeds Writings and Court-Rolls and deservedly the Offender better deserving death than a Robber on a High-way and why any Crimes of this Nature should be publickly Licensed to the Ruin of all Truth and Justice by any Chancellour in his Chancery Orders is very strange the mischievous effects of which said Attachments on Affidavit and Antedating Writs and Forgery of Outlawries are notoriously known and not complained of here without good Cause and Testimony and some particular experience of my own to my loss who have as well as others suffer'd in an high degree by the false Affidavit of a Fellow who Subscribed and Swore it by a false name and not his own and likewise procured a Forged Outlawry antedated against me It belongs not to a Chancellour to be a Judg of Equity in England 5. It belongs not to the Chancellours Office to be a Judg of Equity or to make Orders Edicts Laws or Writs and thereby to Imprison the Persons and dispose of the Lands and Goods of the Subjects Arbitrarily and at his Pleasure Coke 4. part 82. saith That all Statutes which give Authority to the Chancellour to determin Offences in Chancery are to be intended only in the Ordinary Court there which proceeds in Latine and is Secundum Legem c. and not in any Extraordinary Court which proceeds in English Secundum Aequum bonum and 37. H. 6.14 27. H. 8.18 it is Resolved That the Court of Chancery Proceeding by English Bill is no Court of Record and therefore it cannot bind either the State of the Subjects Lands or the Property of his Goods or Chattels and therefore they there admit he may Imprison the Person Chancellour cannot bind the Subject's Goods not Persons which is not only a Non sequitur but a contrary conclusion follows on it for if he cannot bind the Subjects Goods à Fortiori he cannot bind his Person For the Life is more than Meat and the Body is more than Raiment Luke 12.23 And though those Common Law Judge of H. 6. and H. 8. so sordidly deliver'd the Subject Prisoner to the Chancellour so as they might keep his Lands and Goods to themselves yet had they no more Law or Right to do it than they had to deliver him Prisoner to the Turks or to send him to the Barbado's for the Subject is no Slave neither ought he to be given or sold for one without his own Assent by his Representative in Parliament and having so good a Protection against the Chancellours and Common Law Judges and the Orders and Writs of both as Magna Charta and the Petition of Right both for his Lands Goods and Person they ought to shew some greater Laws than their Writs and Orders of Courts or Forgeries of Clerks before they presume to invade either 6. There being no Law in England which ever Ordained a Chancellour to be a Judg of Equity or to make Edicts or Orders concerning the same he can pretend no Title thereto unless from the Laws of France and to that effect Polydor Virgil saith The Chancery came in with the Conquest to which though my Lord Coke saith Perperam Erravit because the Mirror saith The Constitutions of the ancient Kings were that every one should have out of the Chancery of the King a Writ Remedial for his Flaint without difficulty yet he himself seems to be in the Error and not Polydore for though the name of Chancellour and Chancery was before the Conquest and divers other Countries use the name of Chancellour as well as England yet the greatest part of the Writs came from Normandy and are mention'd in their Customary as who will peruse it shall find but as to the Writ of Subpoena Centum librarum and Arbitrary Power of the Chancellour and to be a Judg of Equity came first from the Conquest and was never used before nor did it belong to the Chancellour's Office either of England or Scotland that having other employment and more than a Chancellour could do though he never troubled himself with Judgment but left the same to the Judges to whom the King Delegated the cause by Writ and this the very name of Chancellour testifieth who was Originally no other than a Master of Requests to the Prince whom he served and on Petitions deliver'd to him by the Subjects if unfit to be Granted he strook cross lines over them like Cancelli or Lettices by which he Cancell'd them and thence had his name of the Canceller or Chancellour as Turn lib. 11. advers c. 25. and not according to that Fictitious Verse of his Power Hic est qui Leges Regni Cancellat iniquas For when was ever any Chancellour in England allowed to Cancel any Roll or Act of Parliament And when these Petitions for Justice were deliver'd by the People to this Master of Requests call'd the Canceller of such of them as were Evil such as were Just he Cancelld not but on behalf of the Petitioner Granted the Princes Rescript or Warrant to the Praeses Provinciae where the cause of Action arose or the Defendant lived for Actor Sequitur Forum Rei which Rescript or Warrant we now call a Writ containing in it self 1. A Questus est nobis a short recital of the Complaint 2. Si A. fecerit te securum a taking Security or Pledges of the Plaintiff de Prosequendo 3. A Summoneas or Summons of the Defendant to appear before the Prince himself or such Judges as he Delegated though out of the Province or County where he lived which was the Reason of taking Pledges of the Plaintiff because he made the Defendant appear many times Hundreds of Miles from his Home when he might in those days implead him before the President
Part. Fol. 584. saith And here is to be observed how the Statute of 35. E. 1. hath been dealt with since the 17th of E. 3. for in an Act that Year a branch of the Statute of 35. E. 1. was recited That forbad any thing should be attempted or brought into the Realm which should tend to blemish the King's Prerogative or in prejudice of his Lords and Commons which is now wholy omitted and Fol. 585. he saith Note in the Roll of Parliament of the Statute of 38. E. 3. Cap. 1. of Provisors there are more sharp and biting words against the Pope then in Print a Mystery often in use but not to be known of all men from which examples it is manifest that this came by the Fraud of the Bishops who before Printing were Masters of the Authentick Copies of the Laws appointed for promulgation and since Printing are Masters of the Press to interdict and publish what they will Accipe nunc horum insidias Crimine ab uno Disce omnes These few Frauds are discover'd in Print against the Interdictors of Printers which discovery they would likewise have interdicted if they had been able for these latter Books of my Lord Coke were prohibited to be Printed and got out in the late time of Troubles but by these it is clear which were only spoken obiter and without any inquisition after them that all they are guilty of are not discover'd and that to give either Spiritual or Temporal Judges Power to interdict the Press is to give them Power to have what Law what Gospel what Text what Translation what Canonical what Apocryphal what Scripture what Act of Parliament what Common Law what Statute what Religion what Justice what Liberty and what Slavery they please Besides which Power of Fraud and Forgery destructive to all Truth these further mischeifs follow all interdictions of the Press but I shall first answer such Objections as are made against the Liberty of it Object 1 First If Liberty of the Press should be permitted Enemies would have it equal with Friends Papists with Protestants Hereticks with Orthodox Secondly They would Print Blasphemy Idolatry Treason Rebellion Vncleanness Calumny Reviling Derision and all manner of Heresie Answ 1 To the First is answer'd 1. That it is impossible to exclude Enemies and Papists from Printing they being possess'd of so many Transmarine Presses whence they can with far greater advantage vent their matters then from any Presses in England 2. Admit they could be excluded yet in prudence they ought not but are more necessary to be admitted then Friends for those whom we use to call Friends are pessimum inimicorum genus Adulantes the worst kind of Enemies Flatterers who flatter and sooth us up in our Vices and destroy us but any truth of our Faults we shall never hear but from Enemies Plutarch therefore calls an Enemy a School-Master which costs us nothing 2. As to the matters of Blasphemy Idolatry or Uncleanness neither Enemy or Friend will so far dishonour themselves or their Cause as to Print them openly for it is against their interest As to Treason or Rebellion who that hath an Enemy doth not desire to know before-hand wherein the strength of his Cause as well as of his Forces lies and to have the War Proclaimed in Print before it begin that he may the better provide against Besides if there were but a Law made that nothing shall be printed without the names of the Author and Printer with their Additions and Designations And that all Crimes against the publick committed by Printing should be punished by Indictment according to Law and all injuries to private persons should be reparable by the parties injured on their Actions according to Damage Who would dare make himself guilty of a publick Crime or private Injury in Print to which he had set his name 3. As to matters of Heresie such as by accident become dangerous to public safety the prudence of the Legislators may where they find cause prohibit them both Press and Pulpit but not in the Thoughts and Consciences of Men As in the end of the Wars of Germany between the Lutherans and Catholicks it was Enacted mutually on both sides on pain of death That no Catholick should Preach against the Lutheran Doctrine or Lutheran against the Catholick but both should enjoy the liberty of their own Consciences to themselves This agreement was here made otherwise those bloody Wars would never have ended without a total destruction of one of the Parties And likewise such a Law were here much more necessary between dissentient Protestants who were Brethren then it was between the Lutherans and Catholicks who were mortal Enemies That no dissentient Protestant should Print or Preach publickly on any point of Ceremonial dissentiency or other matter not necessary to Salvation except in such matters as are particularly allowed by Supream Authority to exclude Popery there being Field-room enough in the Moral Law of God to exercise gifts in Preaching and matters which have the promise of this life and of that to come and no cause for any to complain who have liberty likewise of Conscience to use what Protestant Ceremonies and Form of Worship they will to themselves though they have not power to compel the Consciences of others who are dissentients But if Protestants are tolerated to Print or Preach against one another this is the thing the Papist would have and knows will in the end make them both a prey to himself But though Protestants ought not to preach one against another yet the juncture of Affairs being not at present in great Britain as before mention'd in Germany and an appearance of War Plotted by the Papist rather to begin than end with the Protestant the Bishops ought not to be suffer'd to interdict either Press or Pulpit to the Protestants against them To come at length to the further mischiefs insuing the Interdiction of the Press any Interdiction of the Press except in Cases before mention'd either to Friend or Enemy is a dishonour to the Protestant Religion as if it dared not suffer it self to be disputed or to meet an Enemy in the open field whereas in truth it is not Protestancy but Episcopacy 'T is not the Moral Law which is the Protestant Law but the Ceremonial which is the Popish Law which dares not encounter the shock of an Enemy And 't is Fiction and not Truth Vice and not Vertue which fears either Press or Pasquil 2. The Foreign Presses being impossible to be interdicted to the Papist if the English are interdicted to the Protestant he is thereby silenced and prohibited to answer the Papist let him preach what he pleaseth 3. By Interdiction the profit of the English Protestant Print-houses will be transported to Foreign Papists which will be a great discouragement to so necessary a Trade in England and prejudice to the Protestant Religion and Policy 4. The Interdiction of the Press will multiply the greater evil
of Libels and Lampoons It increases unlearned Sects and Heresies who if drawn to Print would either not be able to form their Doctrine in Principles or Positions or if they were they would appear so absurd as would be fit to imploy boys to laugh at rather than Doctors to confute Such were Mahomet's whose Alchoran is not therefore suffered to be Printed or Translated 5. It causes the more dangerous way of spreading Heresies both learned and unlearned to be neglected how to prevent which is the secret creeping into private Houses leading Captive silly Women with whom they walk like the Pestilence in the dark whereas if they appeared in Print or publick Preaching they might be known where they are and opposed 6. It stops the truth of all intelligence which is so invaluable a Treasure and difficult to be got into the Gates of Princes 7. A free Press is the pulse of the Body politic from which is impossible for the wisest State-Physician to discern or prevent the public Distempers unless it is suffer'd to beat free without a Ligature 8. It stops all just causes of complaint and appeal of the Subject to the King and Parliament against Judges and great Officers both Spiritual and Temporal It was my own ill fortune to be prickt Sheriff of a County which enforced me to draw a Petition to be presented to the King and Parliament desiring some remedy against the old Popish Oath continued to be imposed on Sheriffs wherein they swear to destroy the Protestant Religion under the name of Lollary and likewise to be relieved against the extortions of Officers of the Exchequer on Sheriffs which not knowing how otherwise conveniently to Address I appointed the Messenger to get a License to Print which he tryed to do but though there was nothing in it but Humility and Truth as who dare present otherwise to the Legislative Power The Licenser Swore He would not License it for Five Hundred Guinneys whereby it could not be done 9. It stops all presentments by the People to the King and Parliament of public grievances in regard the extent of the Three Kingdoms is great and remote and therefore neither fit nor possible multitudes should come so far to present Petitions in person and if not done in person there are so many Papists and Foreign Agents and their favourers in the way as may and do often intercept from the King's knowledg the humble applications of his Protestant Subjects as is easie to do when perhaps comprised only in one sheet of Paper To avoid therefore the stifling of all just complaints of the Subjects and the ill consequences which have been too often occasioned thereby of presenting Petitions by Tumults and Armies It is far more safe and equal that the Press should be open to the People in all public Addresses to Supream Authority it being many times a sufficient satisfaction to them if they understand that the King and Parliament do but vouchsafe to hear their complaints and desires though they think it not fit to grant them And a Child will often times awe his Enemies from harming him if he do but threaten them he will tell his Father where they know he hath that liberty given him 10. It appears by experience That the Liberty of the Press in Holland and other Foreign States where permitted not only bring no inconveniences but very great benefits and advantages to the People By pretence of giving the King the name of Supremacy they have taken the Thing to themselves The word Supremacy is of so infinite Extent as it can properly be attributed to none but the Divine Power of God and the words Jurisdiction and Government with which it is joyned in the Stat. 1. Eliz. 1. which gives the Form of the Oath of Supremacy are of that Vast Latitude that in their large literal Sense they include all Legislative Judicial and Executive Power amongst men and the Subject matters over which it is exercised are all Divine and Human Rights yea what is more all things Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as well as Temporal circumscribed in nothing to difference it from the Papal Supremacy pretended over Heaven Earth and Hell but the Bounds of her Majesties Dominions within which no wise man ever believed Heaven and Hâ—ll to be contained though the Bishops under pretence of the same Supremacy given her Majesty which the Pope had have in the Royal name exercised the same not only in matters of Marriage Filiation and Succession concerning which I intend here only to contend with them but in all other matters of Oppression of the Consciences and Rights of the Subjects both as to Religion Liberty and Propriety as high as ever the Pope did though never any such Supremacy was intended either by the Statute or Oath to make Canons Judg or Execute but what hath before been or lawfully may be exercised or used so the word lawfully refers to time past as well as future and that neither Pope nor Bishops had ever any lawful Supremacy or Power to make or use Canons or Ecclesiastical Laws concerning Marriage Filiation or Succession but did the same by Usurpation in this Realm is sufficiently proved before against my Lord Coke's Ecclesiastical Law P. 31. and the Form of the Oath makes the Ecclesiastical Supremacy no higher than the Temporal Supremacy which every one knows in all Acts of Legislation is joyntly in the King and Parliament and not singly in either Estate And therefore Bishops can claim to exercise no Supremacy from one unless they have it from both nor of any matter which is not within the Kings Dominions or of any other human Power but only belongs to the Kingdom of God And that Pious Queen her Self who began her Reign with the Statute and Oath of Supremacy soon found the words so general and thereby obscure and the letter wrested to such extremity by Episcopal Expositions that she endeavour'd by a Subsequent Declaration published to have explained and limited according to the true intention but the same not being done by Act of Parliament became not of that Force was desired and left the Bishops more liberty to exercise more Supremacy in the Royal Name by pretence then was in truth intended in the Act or Oath And the subtlety wherewith they glossed their designs appears in the Act it self of which they were the chiefest contrivers For first they begin with a Nolo Episcopare alas as if they intended never to Episcopate or seek for Ecclesiastical Supremacy againâ— for they utterly abolish all Foreign Power which was the Popes and all usurped Power which was their own and annex all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Crown which includes the Jurisdiction of Marriage Filiation and Succession and many other matters for they knew if any part of the Supremacy had been left at Rome they could never have got it to Canterbury and though the one eased the Burden of the Subject no more than the other but rather by