Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	according_a	king_n	parliament_n	2,747	5	6.4655	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91487	Severall speeches delivered at a conference concerning the power of Parliament, to proeeed [sic] against their King for misgovernment. In which is stated: I. That government by blood is not by law of nature, or divine, but only by humane and positive laws of every particular common-wealth, and may upon just causes be altered. II. The particular forme of monarchies and kingdomes, and the different laws whereby they are to be obtained, holden and governed ... III. The great reverence and respect due to kings, ... IV. The lawfulnesse of proceeding against princes: ... V. The coronation of princes, ... VI. What is due to onely succession by birth, and what interest or right an heire apparent hath to the crown, ... VII. How the next in succession by propinquity of blood, have often times been put back by the common-wealth, ... VIII. Divers other examples out of the states of France and England, for proofe that the next in blood are sometimes put back from succession, ... IX. What are the principall points which a common-wealth ought to respect in admitting or excluding their king, wherein is handled largely also of the diversity of religions, and other such causes.	Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610, attributed name.	1648 (1648)	Wing P573; Thomason E521_1; ESTC R203152	104,974	80

no as before hath been shewed which thing were in vain to ask if he were truly King as Belloy saith before his Coronation Again we see in all the formes and different manners of Coronations that after the Prince hath sworn divers times to govern well and justly then do the subjects take other Oathes of obedience and allegiance and not before which argueth that before they were not bound unto him by allegiance and as for the Princes of England it is expresly noted by English Historiographers in their Coronations how that no aliegeance is due unto them before they be Crowned and that only it happened to Henry the fifth among all other Kings his Predecessour to have this priviledg and this for his exceeding towardlinesse and for the great affection of the people towards him that he had homage done unto him before his Coronation and Oath taken Whereof Polidor writeth in these words Princeps Heuricus facto patris funere concilium principum apud Westomansterium convocandum eurat in quo dum de rege creando more maiorum agitabatur esse tibi conti●uo ●aliquot Principes ultro in ejus verba mirare coeperunt quod benevolentiae officium nulli antea priusquam Rex renunciatus esset praestitum constat adeo Henricus ab ineunte aetate sp●m omnibus optimae indolis fecit Polyd●r virg lib. 22. histor Angliae in vita Henrici 5. Which in English is this Prince Henry after he had finished his fathers funeralls caused a Parliament to be gathered at Westminster where whilst consultation was had according to the ancient custome of England about creating a new King behold certain of the Nobility of their own free wils began to swear obedience and loyalty unto him which demonstration of love and good will is well known that it was never shewed to any Prince before until he was declared King So great was the hope that men had of the towardlines of this P. Henry even from his tender age and the very same thing expresseth Iohn Stow also in his Chronicle in these words To this noble Prince by assent of the Parliament all the States of the Realm after 3 dayes offered to do fealty before he was Crowned or had solemnized his Oath well and justly to Governe the Common-wealth which offer before was never found to be made to any Prince of England Stow in the begining of the life of K. Henry 5. In whose narration as also in that of Polidor it may be noted that K. Henry the 5. was not called King untill after his Coronation but only Prince though his father King Henry the 4. had been dead now almost a moneth before And secondly that the Parliament consulted de Rege creando more majorum as Polidor his words are that is making of a new King according to the ancient custome of their ancestors which argueth that he was not yet King though his father were dead nor that the manner of our old English ancestors was to account him so before his admission Thirdly that this demonstration of good will of the Nobility to acknowledge him for King before his Coronation and Oath selemuized well and justly to Governe the Realm was very extraordinary and of meere good will And last of all that this was never done to any Prince before K. Henry the 5 all which points do demonstrate that it is the Coronation and admission that maketh a perfect and true King whatsoever the title by succession be otherwise And that except the admission of the Common-wealth be joyned to succession it is not sufficient to make a lawfull King and of the two the second is of far more importance to wit the consent and admission of the Realm then nearnesse of bloud by succession alone This I might prove by many exampl●s in England it self where admission hath prevailed against right of succession as in Wil. Rufus that succeded the Conquerour and in K. Henry the 1. his brother in K. Stephen K. John and others who by only admission of the Realm were Kings against the order of succession and very specially it may be seene in the two examples before mentioned of the admission of the two Kings Henry and Edward both surnamed the 4. whose entrances to the Crowne if a man do well consider he shall find that both of them founded the best part and most surest of their titles upon the election consent and good will of the people As in their last words to their friends in Sr. Tho. Moore and Stow. Yea both of them at their dying daies having some remorse of conscience as it seemed for they had caused so many men to dye for maintenance of their severall Rights and titles ●ad no better way to appease their own minds but by thinking that they were placed in that roome by the voice of the Realm and consequently might lawfully defend the same and punish such as went about to deprive him You shall find if you looke into the doings of Princes in all ages that such Kings as were most politique and had any lest doubt or suspition of troubles about the title after their deaths have caused their sonnes to be Crowned in their own dayes trusting more to this then to their title by succession thongh they were never so lawfully and lineally discended And of this I could alleadg you many examples out of divers Countries but especially in France since the last line of Capetus came unto that Crown for this did Hugh Capetus himself procure to be done to Robert his Eldest sonne in his owne daies and the like did King Robert procure for his younger son Henry the 1. as Girard holdeth and excluded his elder onely by Crowning Henry in his owne daies Henry also did intreate the States of France to admit and Crown Philip the 1. his eldest son whilst himself reigned An. 1131. and this mans son Luys Le Cros did the same also unto two sons of his first to Philip and after his death to Luys the younger both which were Crowned in their fathers life time and this Luys again the younger which is the seaventh of that name for more assuring of his son named Philip the second intreated the Realm to admit and Crown him also in his own dayes with that great solemnity which in the former chapter hath ben declared And for this very same cause of security it is not to be doubted but that alwaies the Prince of Spaine is sworn and admitted by the Realm● during his Fathers reign The same consideration also moved King David 2 Reg. 1. to Crown his son Salomon in his own daies Our King Henry also the 2 of England considering the alteration of that the Realm had made in admitting K. Stephen Polyd. Stow. in vita Henrici 11. before him against the order of lineall succession by propi●quity of blood and fearing that the like might happen also after him caused his eldest sonne named likewise Henry to be Crowned in his life time so as

of King Etheldred untill the possession thereof gotten by William Duke of Normandy to wit for the space of 50 yeers shall easily see what Authority the Common-wealth hath in such Affaires to al●er Titles of Snccession according as publique necessity or utility shall require for thus briefly the matter passed King E●●ldred seeing himself to 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 untill the death of Sweno And he being dead Etheldred returned into England made a certain agreement and division of the Realme between him and Canutus the Son of Sweno and so dyed leaving his eldest sonne Edmond Iron-side to succeed him who soone 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 Iron-side named Edmond and Edward and sent them over into Swethland which at that time was also subject unto him And caused them to be brought up honourably of which two the elder named Edmond dyed without issue but Edward was marryed and had divers children Eth●ldred and his Son Edmond being dead Canutus the Dane was admitted for King of England by the whole Parl●ament and consent of the Realm anno 1018. and crowned by Alerud Archbishop of Canterbury as Polidor saith and he proved an excellent King and 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 marryed Queene Emma an English woman and mother to King Edward the Confessour and had by her a Son named Hardicanutus and so dyed and was much mourned by the English after he had reigned twenty yeers though his entrance and title was partly by force and partly by election as you have heard After this Canutus the first surnamed the Great for that he was King joyntly both of England Norway and Denmark was dead Polidor saith that all the States of the Realm met together at Oxford ●o consult whom they should make King and at last by the more part of voyces was chose Harald the first Sonne of Canutus by a Concubine King Harald the Bastatd 1038. Polid. l. 8. Hist Ang. By which election we see injury was done to the line all succession of three parties First to the Sons of king Edmond Iron-side that were in Swethland Then to the Princes Edward and Ajerud sons to king Etheldred and brothers to Iron-side that were in Normondy And thirdly to Hardie mutus son to Canutus by his lawfull 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 3 yeers after his election there came from Denmark Hardicanutus to claim the crown that his Father Brother had possessed before him of whose coming Polidor saith libentissimis animis accipitur communiqve omnium consensu rex dicitur an 1041. He was received with great good will of all and by common content made King this was done by the States without any respect had of the succession of those Princes in Normondy Swethland who by birth were before him as hath been shewed this is the second breach after lineal discent after Elthred But this Hardicanutus being dead also upon the sudden 〈◊〉 a certaine banket in Lambeth by London without issue within two yeers after his Coronation the states of the Relm had de●ermined to chuse Aludred for their king who was yonger b●other to Edw. for that cause sent for him out of Normondy as polid recounteth had made him K. without all doubt for that he was esteemed more stirring valiant then his elder brother Edw. had not E. Goodwin of Kent fearing the youngmans stomack raised a strong faction against him thereupon also caused him to be tray●eronsly murthered as he passed through Kent towards London nor had the State here in any respect to Antiquity of bloud for that before Alured were both 〈◊〉 own elder brother P. Ed. who after him was chosen King and before them both were Edm Edw. the children of their elder brother Edmond Iron 〈◊〉 and this the third breach of lineall discent But this notwithstanding Alerud being slain P. Edw. was made King tanta publica lat tia saith Polidor vt certatim pro ejus faelici principatu cuncti vota facerent that is he was made King with such universall joy contentment of all men as every man contended who should pray and make most vows to God for his happy reign and according to this was the successe for he was a most excellent Prince and almost miraculously he reigned with great peace void of all war at home abroad for the space of almost 20 yeers after so infinit broyls as had beene before him ensued after him yet his title by succession cannot be justified as you see for that his eldest brothers Son was then alive to wit Prince Edw. surnamed the outlaw who in this Kings reign came into England brought his wife three lawfull children with him to wit Edgar Margaret and Christian but yet was not this good K. Edw. so scrupulous as to give over his kingdome to any of them or to doubt of the right of his own title which he had by election of the Common-wealth against the order of succession This K. Edward being dead without issue Polidor saith that the States made a great consultation whom they should make King first of all it seemeth they excluded him that was only next by propinquity in bloud which was Edgar Aledin son to the said Prince Edw. the outlaw now departed and Nephew to K. Edmond I tonside the reason of this exclusion is alleadged by Pol. l. 8. in these words is puer id aetatis nondum regno gubernando maturus erat that is he bein● a child of so small yeers was not ripe enough to govern the kingdom and then he saith that Harald son of Earl Goodwin by a daughter of Canutus the first proclaymed himself King an 10●● morover he addeth Nond spt cuit omninoid factum populo qui plurimum spei in Haraldi virtue habehat itaque more majorum sacratus est which is this fact of Harald displeased not at all the people of England for that they had great hope in the vertue of this Harald so was he annoin●ed crowned according to the fashion of the ancient Kings of England by which words we may see that Harald had also the approbation of the Realm to be King notwithstanding that little Edgar was present as hath been said so as this was the 4. breach of succession at this time But in the mean space William Duke of Normandy

of the other two formes of Government also and namely in England all three do enter more or lesse for in that there is one King or Queen it is a Monarchy in that it hath certain Councels which must be heard it participateth of Aristocratia and in that the Commonalty have their voyces and Burgesses in Parliament it taketh part also of Democratia or popular Government All which linitations of the Princes absolute Authority as you see do come from the Common-wealth as having authority above their Princes for their restraint to the good of the Realme From like Authority and for like considerations have come the limitations of other Kings and kingly power in all times and Countries from the beginning both touching themselves and their posterity and successours as briefly in this place I shall declare And first of all if we will consider the two most renowned and allowed States of all the World I mean of the Romans and Grecians we shall finde that both of them began with Kings but yet with farre different Lawes and restraints about their Authorities for in Rome the Kings that succeeded Romulus their first Founder had as great and absolute Authority as ours have now a dayes but yet their children or next in bloud succeeded them not of necessity but new Kings were chosen partly by the Senate and partly by the people as Titus Livius testifieth Livil 1 dec 1. So as of three most excellent Kings that ensued immediatly after Romulus to wit Numa Pompilius Tullius Hostilius and Tarquinius Priscus none of them were of the Bloud Royal nor of kin the one to the other no nor yet Romans borne but chosen rather from among strangers for their vertue and valour and that by election of the Senate and consent of the People In Grecce and namely among the Lacedemonians which was the most eminent Kingdom among others at that time the succession of children after their fathers was more certain but yet Aristotle noteth Arist l. 2. c. 8. Pol. Plutarch in Lycurg Their authority and power was so restrained by certain Officers of the people named Ephori which commonly were five in number as they were not onely checked and chastened by them if occasion served but also deprived and somtimes put to death for which cause the said Philosopher did justly mislike this eminent jurisdiction of the Ephori over their Kings but yet hereby we see what authority the Common-wealth had in this case and what their meaning was in making Lawes restraining their Kings power to wit thereby the more to binde them to do justice which Cicero in his Offices uttereth in these words Justitiae fruendae causa apud majores nostros in Asia in Europa bene morati Reges olim sunt constiti c. at cum jus aquabile ab 〈◊〉 viro homines non consequerentur inventae sunt leges Cic. l. 2. Offic. Good Kings were appointed in old time among our Ancestours in Asia and Europe to the end thereby to obtain justice but when men could not obtain equal justice at one mans hands they invented Lawes The same reason yeildeth the same Philosopher in another place not onely of the first institution of Kingdomes but also of the change thereof again into other Government when these were abused Omnes antiquae gentes regibus quondam paruerunt c. Cic. l. 3. de legibus That is All old Nations did live under Kingdomes at the beginning which kinde of Government first they gave unto the most just and wisest men which they could finde and also after for love of them they gave the same to their posterity or next in kin as now also it remaineth where kingly Government is in use but other Countries which liked not that forme of Government and have shaken it off have done it not that they will not be under any but for that they will not be ever under one onely Thus far Cicero and speaketh this principally in defence of his own Common-wealth I mean the Roman which had cast off that kinde of Government as before hath been said for the offence they had taken against certain Kings of theirs and first of all against Romulus himselfe their first Founder for reigning at his pleasure without law as Titus Livius testifieth for which cause the Senatours at length slew him and cut him in small pieces And afterwards they were greatly grieved at the entring of Scrvius Tullius their sixth King for that he gat the Crown by fraud and not by Election of the Senate and special approbation of the people as he should have done but most of all they were exasperated by the proceeding of their seventh King named Lucius Tarquinius sirnamed the proud who for that he neglected the Lawes of Government prescribed to him by the Common-wealth as namely in that he consulted not with the Senate in matters of great importance and for that he made War and Peace of his own head and for for that he appointed to himselfe a Guard as though he had mistrusted the People and for that he did use injustice to divers particular men and suffered his children to be insolent he was expelled with all his posterity and the Government of Rome changed from a Kingdom unto the Regiment of Consuls after two hundred yeares that the other had endured And thus much of those Kingdomes of Italy and Greece and if likewise we will look upon other Kingdomes of Europe we shall see the very same to wit that every Kingdom and Countrey hath his particular Lawes prescribed to their Kings by the Common wealth both for their Government Authority and Succession in the same for if we behold the Roman Empire it selfe as it is at this day annexed to the German Electours though it be first in Dignity among Christian Princes yet shall we see it so restrained by particular Lawes as the Emperour can do much lesse in his State than other Kings in theirs for he can neither make War nor exact any contribution of men or money thereunto but by the free leave and consent of all the States of the German Die● or Parliament and for his children or next in kin they have no action interest or pretence at all to succeed in their Fathers Dignity but onely by free Election if they shall be thought worthy nay one of the chiefest points that the Emperour must swear at his entrance as Sleydan writeth Sleydan l. 8. Anno 1532. is this That he shall never go about to make the Dignity of the Emperour peculiar or bereditary to his Family but leave it unto the seven Electours free in their power to chuse his Successour according to the Law made by the Pope ●regory the fifth and the Emperour Charles the fourth in this behalfe Blond Dicad 2. l. 3. Crant l. c. 25. The Kingdomes of Poloma and Bohemia do go much after the same fashion both for their restrant of power and succession to their Kings For first touching their

Authority they have great limitation neither can they do any thing of great moment without the consent of certain principal men called Palatines or Castellians neither may their children or next of Bloud succeed except they be chosen as in the Empire Herbert l. 9. Hist Pol. Cromerus l. 3. Hist Polon In Spain France and England the priviledges of Kings are farre more eminent in both these points for that both their Authority is much more absolute and their next in Bloud do ordinarily succeed but yet in different manner for as touching authority it seemeth that the Kings of Spain and France have greater than the King of England for that every ordination of these two Kings is Law in it selfe without further approbation of the Common-wealth which holdeth not in England where no general Law can be made without consent of Parliament but in the other point of Succession it appeareth that the restraint is farre greater in those other two Countries than in England for that in Spain the next in Bloud cannot succeed be he never so lawfully descended but by a new approbation of the Nobility and States of the Realme as it is expresly set down in the two ancient Councels of Tolledo the fourth and fifth Concil blet 4. c. 74. coneil s c. 3. In confirmation whereof we see at this day that the King of Spain's own son cannot succeed nor be called Prince except he be first sworne by the said Nobility and States in token of their new consent and so we have seen it practised in our dayes towards three or four of king Philips children which have succeeded the one after the other in the Title of Princes of Spain and at every change a new Oath required at the Subjects hands for their admission to the said Dignity which is not used in the Kings children of France or England In France the World knoweth how Women are not admitted to succeed in the Crown be they never so near in Bloud neither any of their Issue though it be Male for which cause I doubt not but you remember how King Edward the third of England though he were son and heir unto a daughter of France whose three brethren were kings and left her sole heir to her father king Philip the fourth sirnamed the Fair yet was he put by the Crown Anne 1340. Anil hist Franc. l. 2. Gerard. du Haylan l. 14. hist Franc. as also was the king of Navar at the same time who was son and heir unto this womans eldest brothers daughter named Lewis Huttin king of France which king of Nav●r thereby seemed also to be before king Edward of England but yet were they both put by it and Philip de Vallois a brothers son of Philip the fair was preferred to it by general decree of the States of France and by verdict of the whole Parliament of Paris gathered about the same affaires Franc. Belfor l. 5. c. 1. Anno 1327. Neither did it avail that the two kings aforesaid alleadged that it was against reason and conscience and custome of all Nations to exclude women from the Succession of the Crown which appertained unto them by propinquity of Bloud seeing both Nature and God hath made them capable of such Succession every where as it appeareth by example of all other Nations and in the old Testament among the people of God it selfe where we see Women have been admitted unto kingdomes by succession but all this I say prevailed not with the French as it did not also since for the admission of Dona Isabella Eugenia Clara Infanta of Spain unto the said Crown of France though by dissent of Bloud there be no question of her next propinquity for that she was the eldest childe of the king's eldest sister The like exclusion was then made against the prince of Lorain though he was a man and nephew to the king for that his Title was by a Woman to wit his mother that was younger sister unto king Henry of France And albeit the Law called Salica by the French-men by vertue whereof they pretend to exclude the Succession of Women be no very ancient Law as the French themselves do confesse and much lesse made by Pharamond their first king or in those ancient times as others without ground do affirme Gerard. du Hail l. 13. hist Fra●c Anno 1317. l. 14. Anno 1328 l. 3. de l'Estat defrunce Yet do we see that it is sufficient to binde all Princes and Subjects of that Realme to observe the same and to alter the course of natural Discent and nearnesse of Bloud as we have seen and that the king of Navar and some others of his race by vertue of this onely Law did pretend to be next in Succession to this goodly Crown though in nearnesse of Bloud they were farther off by many degrees from king Henry the third than either the foresaid Infanta of Spain or the prince of Lorain who were children of his own sisters which point yet in England were great disorder and would not be suffered for that our Lawes are otherwise and who made these Lawes but the Common-wealth it selfe By all which we see that divers Kingdomes have divers lawes and customes in the matter of succession and that it is not enough for a man to alleage bare propinquity of blood thereby to prevaile for that he may be excluded or put back by divers other circumstances for sundry other reasons which afterward we shall discusse Yea not onely in this point hath the common-wealth authority to put back the next inheritors upon lawfull considerations but also to dispossesse them that have bin lawfully put in possession if they fulfill not the lawes and conditions by which and for which their dignitie was given them Which point as it cannot serve for wicked men to be troublesome unto their Governours for their own interests or appetites so yet when it is done upon just and urgent causes and by publique authority of the whole body the justice thereof is playne not onely by the grounds and reasons before alleaged but also by those examples of the Romans and Grecians already mentioned who lawfully deposed their Kings upon just considerations and changed also their Monarchie and Kingly Government into other forme of regiment And it might be proved also by examples of all other nations and this perhaps with a circumstance which every man considereth not to wit That God hath wonderfully concurred for the most part with such juditiall acts of the common-Wealth against their evill Princes not onely in prospering the same but by giving them also commonly some notable successor in place of the deposed thereby hath to justify the fact and to remedy the fault of him that went before I am far from the opinion of those people of our dayes or of old who make so little account of their duty towards Princes as be their title what it will yet for every mislike of their owne they are ready to band

pretended that he was chosen before by● K. Edw. the Confessour that the Realm had given their consent thereunto that K. E. left the same testified in his last will testament an 1066. and albeit none of our English Authors do avow the same cleerly yet do many other forrain Writers hold it it seemeth very probable that some such thing had past both for that D. William had many in England that did favour his pretence at his entrance as also as Girard in his French story saith that at his first comming to London he punished divers by name for th●t they had broken their oaths and promises in that behalf Gir l. 6. ●n 1065. And moreover it appeareth that by alledging this title of election he moved divers Princes abroad to favour him in that action as in a just quarrel which is not like they would have done if he had pretended only a conquest or his title of sanguinity which could bee of no importance in the world for that effect seeing it was no other but that his Grandfather and King Edwards mother were brother and sister which could give him no pretence at all to the succession of the crowne by blood and yet we see that divers Princes did assist him and among others the French chronicles Girard so often named before writeth Chron. Cassin l. ● cap. ●4 that Alexander the second pope of Rome whose holinesse was so much esteemed in those daies as one constan●inus After wrote a booke of his miracles being informed by Duke William of the justnesse of his pretence did send him his benediction and a pr●cious ring of ●od with a hollowed banner by which hee gett the victory thus writeth Girard in his French Chronicles and Antonius Archbishop of Florence surnamed Antoninus ●art 2 Chron. ●it 16. cap. 5. s 1. Sainct writing of this matter in his chronicles speaketh great good of vvilliam conqueror commendeth his enterprise But howsoever this was the victory we see he get and God prospered his pretence and hath confirmed his of-spring in the Crown of England more then 500 yeares together so as now acc●unting from the death of King Edmond I consider unto this man we shall find as before I have said in lesse then 5● yeares that 5. or 6 Kings were made in Eng●and one after another by only authority and approbati●n of the ●ommon wealth contrary to the ordinary course of ineall succession by propinquity of blo●d And al this is before the conquest but it we should passe any further down we should find more e●amples then before For first the two sonnes of the Conquerour himselfe that succeeded after him to wit William Rufus and Henry the first were they not both younger brothers to Robert Du●e of Normandie to wh●m the most part of the realme was inclined as Polydor saith Polyd. in vita Gul. Conq. to have given the kingdome presently after the Conquerors death as due to him by succession notwithstanding that W●illiam for perticular displeasure against his elder sonne and had ordein●d the contrary in his testament But that Robert being absent in the War of Hierusalem the holy and learned man Lanfranke as he was accompted then Archbishop of Canterbury being deceived with vain hope of William Rufus An. 107 good nature perswaded th●m the contr●ry who was at that day of high estimation and authority in England and so might indu●e the realme to do what he liked By like meanes gat Henry his younger brother the same crown afterwards to wit by fair pr●mises to the peop●e and by help principally of Henry Newborow ●arle of Warwick that dealth with the nobility for him and Maurice Bishop of London with the cleargie for that Ans●lme Arch bishop of Can●erbury was in ba●nishment Besides this also it did greatly helpe his cause that his elder brother Robert to whom the Crowne by reign appetteined was absent again this second time in the vvarre of Ierusalem and so lost thereby his Kingdome as before Henry having no ther title in the world unto it but by election and admission of the people which yet he so desended afterwards against his said brother Robert that came to claim it by the sword and God did so prosper him the● rein as he took his said elder brother prisoner and so kept him for many yeares untill he died in prison most pitifully But this King Henry dying left daughter behind him named Mawde or Mathilde which being married first to the Emperour Henry the fist he dyed wit●out issue and then was shee married againe the second time to Geffry Pantage●t 〈◊〉 of Earle of Anjow in France to whom she bare a sonne named Henry which this King Henry his grand father caused to be declared for heire apparent to the Crowne in his daies bu● yet after his disceasse for that Stephen Earl of Bollogne born of Adela daughter to William the Conquerour was thought by the state of England to be more 〈◊〉 to governe and to defend the land for that he was at mans age then was Prince Henry a child or Ma●de ●is mother he was admitted and Henry put backe and this chiefly at the perswasion of Henry Bish●p of Winche●●er brother to the said Stephen as also by the sollicitation of the Abbot of Glast●nbury and ●thers who thought be like they might do the same with good conscience for the good of the realm though the even● proved not so well for that it drew all England into factions and divisions for avoyding and ending whereof the states ●●me years after in a Parliament at vval ingford made a agreement that Stephen should be lawfull King during his life only and that Henry and his of-spring should succeed him and that prince vvilliam King Stephens sonne should be deprived of his succession to the crowne and made onely Earle of Norfolke thus did the stat● dispose of the crown at that time which was in the yeare of Christ 1153. To ●his Henry succeded by order his oldest sonne then living named Richard and surnamed Cordelton for his Valour but after him againe his succession was broken For that Iohn King Henries youngest sonne 〈◊〉 youuger brother to Richard whom his father the King had left so unprovided as in jest he was cal●ed by the French Iean sens terre as if you wou●d say Sir Iohn lacke-land this man I say was after the death of his brother admitted and crowned by the states of England and Arthur Duke of Brittaine sonne and heir to Geffry that was elder brother to Iohn was against the order of succession excluded ●nd albeit this Arthur did seeke to remedy the matter by warr yet it seemed that God did more defend this election of the Common wealth then the right title of Arthur by succession for that Arthur was over-come and ta●en by King Iohn though he had the King of Franc● on his side anb he died pitifully in prison or rather as most authors do ho●d he was put to death by King Iohn

it was not his but theirs Why doe the Kings of England France and Spain ask money of their Subjects in Parliaments if they might take it as their own Why are those contributions ●ermed ●y the name of Subsidies helps benevolences lones c. if all be due and not voluntary of the Subjects part How have Parliaments oftentimes denyed to their Princes such helps of money as they demanded Why are their Judges appointed to determine matter of Suits Pleas between the Prince and his Subjects if all be his and the Subject have nothing of his own And last of all why doth the Canon Law so streightly inhibit all Princes upon pain of excommunication to impose new impositions taxes upon their people without great consideration necessity free consent of the givers if all be the Princes nothing of the Subject Nay why be all Princes generally at this day prohibited to alienate any thing of their own Crown without consent of their people if they only be Lords of all and the People have interest in nothing And hereby also we may gather what the Prophet Samuel meant when he thretned the Jews with the disorders of Kings that should reign over them not that these disorders were lawfull or appertained to a righteous King but that seeing they refused ●o be under the moderate government of their high Priests and other Governors which God had given them hitherto required to be ruled by Kings as other Heathen Nations of Egipt Babilon Syria Persia were whose manner of Government not only Historiogr●phers but Phylosophers also Aristotle among the rest doth note to have been very tyrannicall Arist l. 5. pol. c. 11. Joseph l. 6. ant c. 4. yet for that the Jews would needs haue that government as a matter of more pomp glory then that which hitherto they had had Samuel did first iusinuate to them what extortion wickednesse those Heathen Kings did use commonly over their people in taking their children servants wives goods the like from them that many Kings of Israel should do the like take it for their right and Soveraignty should oppose tyranize over them inforce them to cry out to God for help they should not find remedy for that so heddily they had demanded this change of Government which highly displeased Almighty God And this is the true meaning of that place if it be well considered and not to authorize hereby injustice or wickedness in any King seeing the principall point● recorded to all Princes and Kings through all course of Scripture are diligere inducrum justitiam apprebendere disciplinam ●facere veritatem that is to say to love judgement and justice to admit discipline and to execu●e truth and this is the instruction that God gave to the Jewes in Deutronomy Deut. 17. 3. Reg. 2. 10 for their Kings when they should have them which God foretold many yeares before they had any and this is the admonition that King David left unto Psal the 2. his Sonne and successour Salomon at his death and by him to all other Kiogs and Princes and for want of observing their points of judgement justice discipline and truth wee see not only Achab and Iezabel before mentioned grievously punished but many other Kings also by God himselfe as Achaz Manasses Ioachim and the like which had not been justice on Gods part so to punish them if it had been lawfull for them to use that manner of proceeding towards their people as these good instructors of Princes in out daies most fondly and wickedly do affirme and thus much for that place But to the point by what Law the Common-wealthes did punish their evill Princes it is by all law divine and human divine for that God dath approve that form of government which every common-wealth doth chuse unto it selfe as also the conditions statutes und limitations which it selfe shall appoint unto her Princes as largely before hath been declared And by all human law also for that all law both naturall nationall and positive doth teach us that Princes are subject to law and order and that the common-wealth which gave them their authority for the commmon good of all may also restraine or take the same way again if they abuse it to the common evill And whereas these men say that like as if a private man should make his inferiour or equall to be his prince he could not after restrain the same again and so neither the common wealth having once delivered away her authority I answer first that the comparison is not altogether like for that a privat man though he give his voice to make a Pr●nce yet he being but one maketh not the Prince wholly as the Common wealth doth and therefore no marvaile though it lie not in a perticular mans hand to unmake him again besides this a privat man having given his voice to make his Prince remaineth subject and inferiour to the same but the whole body though it be governed by the Prince as by the head yet is it not inferiour but superiour to the Prince neither so giveth the common wealth her authority and power up to any Prince that she depriveth her self utterly of the same when need shall require to use it for her defence for which she gave it And finally which is the chiefest reason of all and the very ground and foundation indeed of all Kings authority among christians the power and authority which the Prince hath from the common wealth is in very truth not absolute but potestas vicaria or deligata that is to say a power deligate or power by commission from the common wealth which is given with such restrictions cautels and conditions yea wi●h such plaine exceptions promises and oathes of both parties I meane between the King and common wealth at the day of his admission or coronation as if the same be not kept but willfully broken on either part then is the other not bound to observe his promise neither though never so solemnly made or sworn for that in all bargains agreements and con●racts where on part is bound mutually and reciprocally to the other by oath vow or condition there if one side go from his promise the other standeth not obliged to performe his and this is so notorious by all law both of nature and nations and so conform to all reason and equity that it is put among the very rules of both the civill and cannon law where it is said frustra a fidem sibi quis postulat servari ab eo cui sidem a se prestitam servare recusat He doth in vaine require promise to be kept unto him at an other mans hands to whom he refuseth to performe that which himselfe promised and againe Non abstringitur quis ●uramento ad implendam quod juravit si ab alia parte non impletur cujus respectu praebuit juramentum A man is not bound to performe that