is not always necessary he should be his first begotten Son for the Second after the Death of the first begotten without Issue is Fitz-Eigne with the Statute Et sic de caeteris which doth implicitly seem to affirm That till the Issue of the Eldest Son fails the second Son shall not Succeed by this Statute which implicitly prefers the Nephews in Successions before the Uncle but he shewing no Authority therein but his own and that only implicit and not Express and the Common Law and Customs of the Crown being very incertain obscure and as often broken as kept when not Confirmed by Act of Parliament And King Edward himself the Wife Author of this Act when the Black Prince Died and left his Eldest Son Richard of Bindeax who was after R. 2. Doubting of the certainty of the Law in the Point did as the wisest way procure Richard to be Declared Successor by Act of Parliament in his Life-time to secure him against his Uncles Tâ—â—â—aw of Eâ—… not clear in point of Succession of the Crown between Nephew and Uncle where the Father dies before the Grandfather The certainty of the Law of England therefore may be not without Cause doubted in this Point of Succession between Nephew and Uncle and Danger there may be lest the incertainty of the same give the same Pretences to create Civil Wars here as it doth in other Countries unless prevented by an Act of Parliament as in Scotland Vt filio ante patrem Defuncto Nepos Avo Subrogaretur 8. Danger without Assent of the People Danger if the Successor assume the Crown without the Assent of the People by their Representative in Parliament the Right of a Successor is not here Disputed nor the Law whether he is King before Coronation or not until Contract with his Parliament and Coronation received from them Highest a Successor can say is only as Paul saith 1 Cor. 10.23 All things are lawful for me but all things are not expedient All things are lawful for me but all things edifie not Though the manner whereby a Successor ascends the Throne may be lawful yet may it not be Expedient neither may it Edifie the Throne H. 8. was a King of great Courage and Wisdom and doubted not the Right of him and his Posterity to the Crown Yea though he had more than any other King Power granted him by Act of Parliament himself to Declare his own Successor either by his Letters Patents or last Will yet he shewed therein his great Wisdom and Moderation and would not do it without Assent of his Subjects as appears in the already mentioned Statute 35 H. 8. cap. 1. in these words viz. And albeit that the King 's most Excellent Majesty for default of such Heirs as are Inheritable by the said Act might by the Authority of the said Act give and dispose the said Imperial Crown and other the Premisses by his Letters Patents under his Great Seal or by his Last Will in Writing Signed with his most gracious Hand to any Person or Persons of such Estate therein as should please his Highness to Limit and Appoint Yet to the Intent that his Majestie 's Disposition and Mind therein should be openly Declared and Manifestly known and notified as well to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal as to all other his Loving and Obedient Subjects of this his Realm to the intent that their ASSENT and CONSENT might appear to Concur with thus far as followeth of his Majestie 's Declaration in this behalf For so Wise a King well know that let the Right of a Successor be what it will yet if he lose the Love of his People which cannot be obtained without their Assent and Consent he loseth the Chief Defence under God of that and all other Right he hath if therefore a Successor is Declared by Act of Parliament so great a Danger is avoided of not having the Assent and Consent of his Subjects seeing such an Act of Parliament cannot be without the Assent and Consent of the major part of the People included in the plurality of Votes of their Representative 9. Danger of assuming the Crown by a Papist The next great Danger is The assuming of the Crown by Force by a Papist Successor if not prevented by a Declaration of a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament That a Papist Successor is most Dangerous to all Lay-Papists themselves and that they may Live far more Happy under a Protestant than one of their own Religion A Distinction ought to be made between Lay-Papists and Papist Priests Both Religion Justice and Mercy ingage all those who are affected with the least of any of them to put a great difference betwixt the Deceived and Deceivers and betwixt the Blind and those who mislead them to fall into the Ditch A Distinction is therefore necessary to be made by all Protestants between the Lay Papist and the Papist Priest Mercy is to be shewn the one and Justice the other And if this just Course had been used from the Beginning of the Reformation that no Penal Statute had been made against the Lay-Papists but only against the Papist Priests The Protestant cannot be secure unless the Lay Papist be likewise secure from Penal Laws against Conscience No Bishop Bencroft under pretence of maintaining the Dominicans against the Jesuits and Regulars against Seculars had been able to maintain Legions of both in Secret to Destroy the Protestants in their own Land nor under the blind name of Recusants to turn the edge of all the Penal Laws pretending to be made against Papists to cut off the Protestants And the Sacrament of the Paschal Lamb to be a Destruction to the Israelites and a Passover to the Egyptians those Penal Laws being pursued with the highest Rigour against the Protestants but came not near the Papists Dwellings or if they did they took more easie Pardons from the Exchequer than from the Pope So if the late Act concerning Oaths and Sacraments had been Restrained only to Papists Protestants had not suffered in so high a Degree as now they do But I pass from what is past to what is future to shew what Mischiefs the Papists themselves are to expect from a Papist Successor and what benefit from a Protestant 1. The first Mischiefs they will meet with in a Papist Successor is a most miserable one take what Covenant what Vow what Promise what Oath they can from him yea an Hundred Oaths his Conscience cannot be bound with any of them and the Catholicks themselves shall take as little hold of his Catholick Faith as the most of those whom they think or call Hereticks As for Example William the Conqueror was a Papist and is mentioned Dan. Hist 36. to get Assistance of the King of France who was then young in his Design for England William the Conqueror a Papist King forswore himself to Papist Subjects promised if he obtained the Kingdom to hold it
THE RIGHT OF PRIMOGENITURE In Succession to the Kingdoms of ENGLAND SCOTLAND and IRELAND AS DECLARED By the Statutes of 25 E. 3. Cap. 2. De Proditionibus King of ENGLAND AND Of Kenneth the Third and Malcolm Mackenneth The Second Kings of SCOTLAND AS LIKEWISE Of 10 H. 7. made by a Parliament of Ireland With all Objections answered and clear Probation made That to Compass or Imagine the Death Exile or Disinheriting of the KING 's Eldest Son is High Treason To which is added An Answer to all Objections against Declaring him a Protestant Successor with Reasons shewing the Fatal Dangers of Neglecting the same And when the Husbandmen saw the Son they said amongst themselves This is the Heir come let us kill him and seize on his Inheritance Matth. 21.38 London Printed for the Author 1681. THE PREFACE Reader THE General Question now in Agitation amongst the People is Who is next Lawful Heir to the Crown The Protestant saith The King 's Eldest Son The Papist a Collateral Heir The free Statesman None at all The Two incident Questions to the General and Principal are not rightly stated for they are not as they ought to be made Whether here is a Lawful Marriage or a Lawful Filiation But whether there are Witnesses to prove the Papal and Episcopal Ceremonies of a Marriage and a Filiation which false state the Case and are nothing to the purpose But we cannot come to the resolution either of the Principal or Incidents false or true before the Discussion of Two other Preparatory Questions 1. By what Law Marriage Filiation and Succession ought to be judged Lawful or Unlawful 2. By what Judge the same ought to be judged As to which I have already proved at large in the First Book That the same ought to be judged by no other Law than the Moral Law of God And in the Second That the same ought to be judged by no other Judge than the King and Parliament To avoid therefore vain Repetitions I must desire to refer thee to the First and Second Books for thy full Satisfaction and in this Third shall only from the Two other Premisses make this Conclusion That the King 's Eldest Son is the next undoubted Lawful Heir both by the Law of God and of the Land wherein though I wave the false state of the Question Whether Ceremony or no Ceremony and only insist on the true Whether Lawful or Unlawful yet I desire thou wilt accept these following Reasons for my Excuse 1. In reference to the Parties contending 2. The Laws by which they are to be judged 3. The Witnesses 4. The Court by which they are to be judged As to the Parties contending 1. Because as to the Matter of Fact Whether Ceremony or no Ceremony I am altogether a Stranger and know nothing of it and if I did yet all Council are Prohibited by the Law to speak to any Matter of Fact 2. This hinders not any others from using what Probation they shall please of Ceremonies but all Advantages of the same are hereby to them saved by Protestation 3. This seeks not to hinder any from using what Ceremonies in their Marriages they please which suit best with their Consciences and Conveniences only that which is here affirmed is the Lawfulness and Validity of the Marriages of such with whose Consciences or Conveniences such Ceremonies suit not if they are made without them 4. No Liberty of Conscience no not so much as of Opinion is hereby precluded any man touching the Point in Question nor is he hinder'd from opposing any thing here deliver'd but if he differ is invited to do it so it be in Print with Name subscribed whereby the same Liberty may be given to Reply 5. Because I write to Protestants and only desire to give Satisfaction to Conscience concerning Lawful and Unlawful before God and not to Superstition concerning Ceremony and no Ceremony before the Bishop 6. It were more for the Safety and Interest of the Protestant Religion that a Protestant Prince either waved his Legitimacy by the Papal and Episcopal Ceremonies and Law or were totally Illegitimated by the same as King Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth were and as they did Claim his Legitimation and Title from the most Righteous Sacred and Immutable Moral Law of God and the Law of the Land and not from Pontifical Laws To speak next in reference to the Laws by which Marriage and Filiation ought to be judged which are the Laws of God and of the Land agreeing with the same I wave insisting on Ceremonies 1. Because those Laws Civil or Canon of Emperors Popes Bishops Synods or Councils of Trent or other Councils which Impose Ceremonies on Marriage are neither the Laws of God nor of the Land but Usurpations as I have already proved at large Lib. 1. p. 43. Et Lib. 1. p. 31. Et Lib. 2. p. 182 183. 2. To set any value on the Ceremonies of those Laws were to give the Supremacy of the King and Parliament and the Laws enacted by them concerning Marriage Filiation and Succession to Popes and Bishops and their Canons and thereby to give them power to Depose Kings and give or sell the Successions of Kingdoms to whom they please 3. It is cleerly and unanswerably proved in the following Discourse That the Marriage now under consideration was a Lawful Holy and Indissoluble Marriage by the Moral Law of God as declared both in Nature and Scripture To bring a Ceremonial Law therefore where the Moral is so clear were to bring a Candle to give light to the Sun Then next as to the Laws of the Land The Marriage Filiation and Succession are as clear by them as by the Law of God As 1. by this present Statute 2. E. 3. cap. 2. of Treasons as is proved at large and all Objections answered in the following Discourse 2. By the Jus Coronae which is the Common Law of the Land whereby the Law of Succession to the Crown differs from that of Succession to Subjects proved likewise as before 3. By the Law of Necessity which is not only the Law of this but of all Lands and not only of Lands but Seas The time of this Marriage being alleadged to be in a time of War when the Ceremonies of the Common Prayer-Book and it self were abolish'd and prohibited by the Predominant Power of the Sword and the place beyond Sea and in Exile 4. By Presumptions which as to Marriage Filiation and Legitimation are the Law of the Land Praesumptiones Juris de Jure for to speak truly the same are impossible to be proved by Witnesses or any other way than by Presumption as is implyed by the Common Rule Filiatio non potest probari and likewise more fully shewn Lib. 1. p. 104 105. Now the Ground and usual Presumptions of Marriage and Legitimation by the Laws of the Land and of the very Canon and Civil Laws themselves Are 1. Fame and Reputation of Marriage 2.
in England or Scotland makes the Children either of Papist or Protestant born of Marriages not prohibited by the Law of God Illegitimate Therefore all Children born of Marriages not prohibited by the Law of God are Legitimate by the Law of the Land for though some Penal Laws have been by Pontifical pretences procured which have presumed too far to prohibit contrary to the Divine Ordinance Marriages and Meats not prohibited by the Law of God yet none but the Pope and Council of Trent who in their Luciferian Pride pretend to power above God's Law ever transgress'd so far in these Kingdoms as by such penal Laws to null or make void such Marriages or to Illegitimate their Children or though they imposed penalties on the Parents to impose any on the Children as may appear by the Statutes 3 Jac. 5. for England prohibiting Popish Recusants to Marry otherwise than by a Minister lawfully authorized in some open Church or Chappel according to the Orders of the Church of England And the Act Car. 1. Par. 2. Sess 2. Act 8. fol. 88. for Scotland prohibiting any to Marry in another Kingdom without the Banns first proclaimed in Scotland And that the Omission of Ceremonies contrary to a penal Law neither Nulls the Marriage nor Illegitimates the Issue Vid. proved before Lib. 1. p. 110 111. 7. Frustra probatur quod probatum non relevat It were time mispent to prove Ceremonies which when they are proved prove nothing to the Matters in question which are a lawful Lady Companion as intended by this Statute and an eldest Son by her of the Blood of King Charles the Second the rightful present Possessor of the Three Kingdoms and of the Blood and of his two special Predecessors King Edward the Third of England and King Fergusius of Scotland as to which Probation of the Ceremonies of a Marriage proves nothing of the Truth or Lawfulness of the Marriage for many Ladies have been Married with all the Ceremonies the Priest could lay on them yet have their Marriages been utterly unlawful and prohibited by the Law of God nor do they prove the Truth or Lawfulness of the Lineal Blood derived from the Possessors or Predecessors As for Example The Kings of Sparta were to be of no other Blood but of the race of Hercules these were Married with all the Ceremonies accustomed in that Kingdom yet did not those Ceremonies preserve the Chastity of the Queen from being so over-familiar with Alcibiades her Husband 's ingrateful Guest and whom he had hospitably entertain'd when fled from his own Country of Athens but he having got her with Child boasted when he was gone from thence that he had left Heirs of his Blood to the Kingdom of Lacedaemon So Henry of Spain Anno Dom. 1459. having Married his Queen with all the Ceremonies accustomed in that Kingdom but being unable himself perswaded her to be got with Child by Bertrand of Guttua Joan thus gotten is proclaimed Heir but refused by the people Bertrand is made Earl of Ledesma and Duke of Alburquerk Sp. Hist Canutus the Dane Married here in England Algine who was Barren she to oblige the love of her Husband feigned her self with Child and packt one that was Suppositions on her Husband King Canutus was very joyful of his supposed Son and called his Name Sweno and after gave him the Kingdom of Norway Philip the Second of Spain was Ceremoniously Married to Queen Mary for whose being with Child as was supposed a Day of Publick Thanksgiving was kept and the Bells rang with Joy through all England but as is said King Philip was Jealous of the like Issue with Canutus what had the proof of the Ceremonies of Marriage been to the purpose to prove Adulterous Children to be of the race of Hercules or Henry or such as had been Suppositions of the Danish or Spanish Races 8. It were a Dishonour to the Holy Protestant Religion and the Professors thereof to be able to Establish the Lawfulness and Validity of their Marriages on no more Sacred Principles than Ceremonies of so unclean an Original as Popes Common Prostitutes Magicians Aruspices Astrologers Southsayers Priests of Priapus and Venus Pagan Gods and Goddesses and Daemons themselves as is already proved Lib. 1. p. 43 44.51 52. Then as to Witnesses It were an unnecessary Tempting of God to cast what is not the cause of a single person but of all the Protestants in the Three Kingdoms on the hazard of such Witnesses as the Probation of Ceremonies Thirty years since and in a Foreign Catholick Country will require for it is certain the Bishops and Magistrates of that Countrey are Papists and therefore no equal Witnesses may be had thence but such as may think it is Meritorious to overthrow the Protestants right or wrong and the same Danger is of Witnesses at home obnoxious to as great Temptations of Papists here whose Religion is not to keep Faith with Hereticks as they call Protestants whereby they may as is commonly practised be corrupted with Money either in a counterfeit manner to offer their Testimonies and when they have Sworn to Recant and Reprobate themselves whereby the Truth shall be betrayed or a greater Number of false Witnesses be Suborned to Swear against the Truth then may be got to Swear for it whereby the Truth shall be destroyed or such Judges may be as will hear no Witnesses but such as are right for the turn whereby the Truth will be suppressed of which Popish practices too much hath appeared fresh before our Eyes in the Examination of the late Horrid Plot. Therefore no Prudence to give them opportunity to do the like or worse by joyning Issue with them on the Impertinent point of Ceremonies of Marriage wherein only they are able to corrupt Witnesses But it is more secure to stand on the points of Substance of Marriage according to the Law of God which are these viz. Cohabitation Conjugal Society Chastity Children and acknowledgment of them by the Father to be his of which God's Providence hath provided so many Witnesses as will be in vain for them to Suborn or Corrupt false Witnesses to the contrary Besides if Witnesses may be had yet alive after Thirty years time yet they may Die or be Poison'd or otherwise made away when known before they come to Hearing or so terrified that they will not dare to testifie the Truth why then shall all be put in danger by Ceremony when Substance Places all in Security and it were an injust thing Three Kingdoms should be hazarded on the Lives of two or three Witnesses To speak at last in reference to the Judges and Court by whom this Marriage ought to be judged which ought to be only by the King and Parliament both as to the Fact and the Law for as to both the same as alleadged being made beyond Sea in a Foreign Catholick Country not under the Jurisdiction of the King and Parliament nor where his Writ runneth The Archbishop of
making the Crown Hereditary to the Eldest Son answered ibid. Objections against the being of the King 's Eldest Son within the Statute of 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus Page 20. Obj. 1. That the Lady Mother was not a Queen ibid. Answ 1. The Statute is false Translated by the Lawyers and the Scripture false Translated by the Bishops in the word Queen ibid. Answ 2. Proved that the Lady Mother was Madam sa Compaign according to the Moral Law of God which is all and more than is required to be proved by the Statute ibid. Obj. 2. No Marriage according to the Mass-Book in the time of E. 3. nor by the Modern Common Prayer-Book or Book of Canons Page 23. Answ 1. No Marriage by any Book required by the Statute but only a Lady Companion according to the Moral Law of God Page 24. Answ 2. Marriage by the Common Prayer-Book not Necessary in a time of War when both Books of Common Prayer and of Canons were Prohibited and Abolished by the Power of the Sword ibid. Answ 3. The Legitimation of Children by the Law of God and of the Land ought not to be question'd after the Death of either Parent where not Judicially question'd and sentenced in their life-time Vid. Praeface Page 25. Answ 4. Not Necessary for a King who is Supreme Ordinary to Marry by the Common Prayer Book or Book of Canons Page 26. Answ 5. A King who is Supreme Ordinary may dispence with his own Canons and with any thing that is only Malum Prohibitum in his own Marriage but not with what is Malum in se by the Moral Law of God Page 28. Obj. 3. The Lady Mother was not HIS Companion which is the Article of Propriety required by the Statute Page 32. Answ She was HIS and he had the sole Propriety according to the Law of God and the Land Page 33. Obj. 4. There was no Marriage according to the Law of God Page 34. Answ 1. Certain Preparatory Considerations are laid down before the contrary is proved to this Negative By what Law and what Judges shall be judged what is the Law of God by which is after proved here was a Marriage according to the Law of God ib. Answ 2. Of the damnable Effects have followed by the Popish Prohibitions and Nulling of all Marriage not made by a Priest in a Temple Page 35. What is not Marriage by the Moral Law of God Page 39. What is not Matrimony by the Moral Law of God ibid. Answ 3. The Statute requires neither a King De Jure nor a Lady Companion De Jure nor a Son De Jure but only De Facto yet are they all here both De Jure and De Facto Page 40. Dangerous to leave the Succession of a Kingdom on so incertain a word as Lawful yet here both the King the Lady Companion and the Son are all Lawful ibid. Answ 4. A Lawful Successor may be of an unlawful Marriage Page 41. Obj. 5. The Lady Mother was not a Wife according to the Scripture Page 42. Answ 1. The Objection is false and it is after proved she was a Wife according to the Scripture ibid. Answ 2. The Statute requires no Wife according to Scripture but only a lawful Companion yet was she both a Wife and a lawful Wife according to Scripture as will hereafter be proved Page 43. Answ 3. The Bishops have falsly Translated the Scripture in all words relating to Marriage ibid. Of certain Differences between a Wife of the Bishop's making and a Wife of God's making Page 46. Obj. 6. There is no Bishop's Certificate to testifie the Marriage and Filiation Page 48. Answ The Statute requires no Certificate of either ibid. The Forms of Bishops Certificates Page 49. Their Original came from the Priests of Priapus Page 50. Of the Damnable Mischiefs insue from Tryal of Marriage and Filiation by Bishops Certificates ibid. The Certificates of Bishops inconsistent with the Right of Primogeniture Page 58. Of the General Custom of Nations of Successions to Kingdoms by Primogeniture and of the Mischiefs and Civil Wars commonly follow the disinheriting of the Eldest Son Page 62. What is Marriage and what Matrimony de Facto Page 66. What is Marriage De Jure according to the Law of God and of the Nations Page 67. Of the three Lawful Marriages amongst the Romans 1 Usu 2 Confarreatione 3 Coemptione Page 68. Of the three Lawful Marriages amongst the Hebrews 1 Copulatione 2 Coemptione 3 Instrumentis ibid. That Carnal knowledge Chastity and Childbirth between a Man and a Woman not prohibited by the Moral Law to Marry makes a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble without Banns Licence Priest Temple or any other Ceremony whatsoever Page 71. That the Marriage Coemptione Confarreatione or Instrumentis was not intended by Christ but only the Marriage Copulatione Page 86. An Epithalamium on the Marriage of Nature intended by Christ without a Priest or Temple Page 88. Obj. 7. The King 's Eldest Son is not the Heir intended by the Statute Page 90. Answ Proved he is the Heir both in the Letter and Intention of the Statute ibid. That to compass the Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's Eldest Son is High Treason Page 94. Obj. 8. By the Custom of Nations the Succession goes not to the Eldest Son born when the Father is only a Prince but to a younger Son born when he is a King ibid. Answ This Statute was made to prevent incertainty of this and other Customs and prevent all Cavils and Contentions about Succession by ascertaining the same to the Eldest Son Page 95. Obj. 9. The King 's Eldest Son is not yet declared Prince of Wales or of the Scots ibid. Answ The Statute requires no such thing Page 97. Obj. 10. Illegitimacy deprives of the benefit of the Statute ibid. Answ This Statute declares every Eldest Son of a King Legitimate and Heir to the Crown ibid. The Eldest Son of a King of Great Britain is Legitimate by his Birth-right per Jus Coronae ibid. Examples of the same Jus Coronae in other Nations Page 100. Examples of the same Jus Coronae in the Eldest Sons and Daughters of the Kings of England and Scotland who have thereby succeeded as Heirs to their Fathers Kingdoms on Marriages according to the Moral Law of God without the Ceremonies of a Priest or a Temple Page 102 103. That 't is High Treason for any Subject to slander the King 's Eldest Son with Illegitimacy Page 111. A Comparison of the Popish slanders of Illegitimacy against Queen Elizabeth and the King 's Eldest Son Page 112. A Comparison of the Popish slanders of Illegitimacy against King Edward the Sixth Queen Elizabeth the King 's Eldest Son and the Sons and Daughters of the whole Protestant Clergy Page 114. Of the insolent absurdity of Popish Laws Disinheriting the Lawful Sons of Kings according to the Law of God and inheriting the Bastards of Popes by the Law of the Devil
Page 118. CAP. II. WHether necessary in the present juncture of Affairs for the King and Parliament to declare a Protestant Successor to the Three Kingdoms Page 121. Objections against it Answer'd Obj. 1. Declaring a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament makes a Kingdom Elective and not Hereditary ibid. Obj. 2. Acts of Precedent Parliaments cannot bind Subsequent from repeal Page 122. Obj. 3. Acts of Parliament cannot bind the Power of the Sword from cutting off those Acts by Conquest Page 123. Obj. 4. Declaring a Successor by Act of Parliament incites him to be disobedient and rebellious ibid. Obj. 5. The Ottoman Emperors never declare a Successor Page 124. Obj. 6. Queen Elizabeth refused to Declare a Successor Page 127. Reasons for declaring a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament with the Great Dangers insue the neglect Page 132. 1. Danger to the Conscience of the Prince ibid. 2. Danger by the incertainty of the Laws of Succession of the Crown Page 133. 3. Danger of the Arbitrary disposing of the Crown by Rome or Canterbury Page 134. 4. Danger of the Predominancy of Papal and Episcopal Laws of Marriage Filiation and Succession above the Moral Law of God and the Laws of the Land ibid. 5. Danger to the King's Person his Lineal Heirs and House Page 135. 6. Danger of Lineal and Collateral Heirs to destroy one another ibid. 7. Danger if the King 's Eldest Son should happen to die before his Father leaving his Heir and younger Children in Minority ibid. 8. Danger of a Successor without Assent of the People Page 137. 9. Danger of a Papist Successor Page 138. A Papist Successor more dangerous to Papists themselves than a Protestant Successor ibid. A Papist Successor or Male utterly Destructive to Protestants and a Female doubly Destructive Page 160. 10. Danger in regard of Foreign Princes Page 182. 11. Danger of exposing Succession to Counterfeit Wills and Testaments Page 190. 12. Danger of incouraging Vsurpers Page 191. 13. Danger in doubtful Titles of Interregnums Page 192. 14. Danger of Cantonizing the Kingdoms ibid. 15. Danger of Exposing the Succession of the Kingdoms to Sale Page 193. 16. Danger of Exposing the Succession of the Kingdoms to Conquest Page 197. LIB III. CHAP. I. The words of the Statute 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus as in the Original French AUxint pur ceo que divers Opinions ont estre eins ceax heurs quel Case doit estre dit Treason et en quel nemy le Roy a le request des Seigniors et Commons ad fait declarisment que ensuist cestassavoire quant home fait compasser ou imaginer la Mort nostre Seignior le Roy Madame sa compaigne ou de lour fits Eigne et Heir The words as Translated by Pulton and Coke into English WHereas divers Opinions have been before this time in what case Treason shall be said and in what not the King at the request of the Lords and Commons hath made a Declaration in the manner as hereafter followeth That is to say When a man doth Compass or Imagine the Death of our Lord the King of our Lady his Queen or of their Eldest Son and Heir The Statutes of Kenneth the Third and Malcolm Mackenneth the Second as related by Buchanan Lib. 6. Rer. Scot. p. 191 196. Adjectae sunt Aliae leges ut quemadmodum Regi maximus natu filius in regnum Succederit ita filio ante Patrem defuncto nepos avo subrogaretur Englished There were other Lawes also added That as the Eldest Son of the King should succeed to him in his Kingdom So if such Son dyed before the Father the Nephew should succeed in his stead to his Grandfather Another Law of Scotland mention'd by Skene Reg. Majest Lib. 2. cap. 33. De Nepote ex Primogenito filio Nepos ex filio Primogenito mortuo jure representationis succedit Avo suo filium postnatum Avi id est Avunculum suum excludit Englished The Eldest Son being dead before the Father the Nephew by the Eldest Son shall in right of Representation Succeed to his Grandfather and exclude any Younger Son of his Grandfather that is to say his Uncle This Law of Scotland was taken out of Glanvil Lib. 7. c. 3. which shews it is the unquestionable Law of England as well as of Scotland and likewise out of the Civil Law L. 3. C. de suis legit Haered l. Posthumorum 13. H. de Injust Testamento c. 33. ex l. 1. § 6. H. de Haered Skene saith further That of this Question between the Son of the Eldest Son and the Uncle Franciscus Vinius Treats at large Lib. 3. Decisionum Decis 501. and he allcadgeth Alciat Cons 101. Bartol in l. post fratres C. 1. de legit haered Bald. Salyc Doctores in l. si viva Mater C. de Bon. Pater The Statute made 10 H. 7. in a Parliament of Ireland called Poyning's Law The words of which are these It is Enacted That all Statutes late made within the Realm of England concerning or belonging to the Common or Publick Weal of the same from henceforth be deemed Good and Effectual in the Law and ever that be accepted used and executed within this Land of Ireland in all Points and at all times requisite according to the Tenor and Effect of the same Coke saith 4 Part 351. That Hil. 10. Jac. Regis it was resolved by the Two Chief Justices and Chief Baron that this word late in the beginning of this Act had the sense of before so that this Act extended to Magna Charta and to all Acts of Parliament made in England before this Act of 10 H. 7. And by the same Reason extends to the Statute of 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus on which this Discourse is founded from whence will be after proved these Conclusions Conclusion 1. This being granted That if the Eldest Son had happen'd to Die in the Life of his Father the Eldest Son of the Prince who died should have Succeeded Jure Representationis of his own Father as Heir Lineal to his Grandfather and excluded the Grandfather's Younger Son who is his Uncle à fortiori must it be granted that if both Grandfather and Father die the Eldest Son who is the Grandchild Surviving he ought to exclude his Uncle for he now comes in Jure proprio which is a greater Right than Jure representationis and if the less Right exclude the Uncle much more must the greater Conclusion 2. When the Right of the Crown shall actual descend from the King in Possession on the Eldest Son in Possession who is the next Lineal Heir of his Blood then is the Son Actually King both De Facto and De Jure as was his Father who died in Possession of the Kingdoms And therefore all the forementioned Acts of Parliament and Common Laws of England Scotland and Ireland and the Imperial Laws with them unanimously declare It will be not only then High Treason to Compass the Death Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's
truth in what the Flatterers of Kenneth boast that by this means the Govetousness and Slaughters of Kindred are avoided Neither are the Treacheries of Guardians less to be feared to the Children of Kings left in Minority than of their Kindred wherefore now the Tyrant being fallen who Ravished our Liberty let us valiantly resume the same and his Law Enacted by force and assented to by fear if it be a Law and not rather a selling us for Slaves let us abrogate and repeal the same and Restore again our Ancient Fundamental Laws which brought forth this Kingdom of nothing and from so small beginnings not only advanced to such an height as is inferiour to none of our Neighbours but when cast down hath again raised the same to its former Strength and let us imbrace the present opportunity while it offers it self which if once Elapsed we may in vain seek again The People are by this perswaded and the Twelfth day after the Funeral of Kenneth he is chosen King Anno Domini 994. And was after Slain in Battel in the Town of Vaumond in Louthian in the Second Year of his Reign And though Milcolumbus or Malcolm the second Son of Kenneth the Third who was so tormented in Conscience for Poysoning the first Son of his Brother Duffus to get an Act to Intayl the Grown to his own Posterity made no Conscience to kill Grinius another Son of the same Duffus in Battel Malcolm Son of Kenneth revives and confirms the Law making the Kingdom hereditary and having by the Success gotten the Power of the Sword into his hand in the Same manner as his Father Kenneth had by force Enacted again by force confirmed at the Same Scone by Parliament the Act of Intayl of the Crown to the Issue of Kenneth Buchanan 196. Yet doth Buchanan the same Historian p. 200 201 censure this Act of changing the Ancient Law of Election by Parliament of the Brother or any other person more fit than the Son to be Injust Imprudent and Infortunate Objections against the Reviver 1. Injust 1. Injustice Because he saith Italex enervat vires consilij publici sine quo nullus Legitimus dominatus potest consistere Such a Law enervates the Strength of Parliaments without which no Lawful Government can be for all Government is either by Conquest or Contract As to Conquest there is none demanded or acknowledged on Such a Title As to Contract there can be none without a Parliament who are the Representative of the People to contract for them 2. Imprudent â— Imprudence Because Propinquorum in eos qui Regno potiuntur insidias et Regnantium adversus eos quos et natura et lex voluit â—â—ique esse Charissimos suspitiones nesarias quas narrationis or do Exphrabit tot priorum Seciâ—â—orum clades cum illis collatae calamitatibus quae Alexandri tertij interitum sunt consecutae Leves prae ijs tolerabiles videri possunt The Treacheries of Kindred against those who enjoy the Kingdom and the wicked Suspitions of those who Reign against them who by the Bonds of Nature and Law they ought to esteem most dear as this discourse in order shall declare And the Slaughters of so many former Ages compared with the Calamities which hereby followed the death of Alexander the Third were light and tolerable Note Alexander the Third began his Reign Anno Domini 1649. he Married first Margaret Daughter to Henry the Third King of England by whom he had Alexander the Prince David and Margaret who married Hangonamus or as some call him Ericus Son to Magnus 4th King of Norway who bare him a Daughter commonly called the Maiden of Norway The Maiden of Norway had United England and Scotland if she had lived Skene And concerning this Lady of Norway saith Buchanan Lib. 8. p. 241. Edvardus Anglorum Rex gnarus suae sororis neptem Regis Norvegiae filiam unam Ex Alexandri posteris esse superstitem Eandemque Regni Scotorum Legitimam Heredem Legatos ad eam deposcendam filio suo in Scotiam misit c. Edward the First King of England knowing his Neice the Daughter of the King of Norway to be the only Remaining Issue of Alexander the Third and Lawful Heir to the Crown of Scotland he sent his Ambassadours into Scotland to ask her in Marriage for his Son They when they Argued much in the Publique Gonvention of the Publique Benefit which would ensue such Marriage they found the Minds of the Scots not Dis-inclined from that affinity for Edward was a man of great Courage and of great Power and Ambition of greater And the glory of his Valour in the Holy Warr while his Father was alive and in Subduing Wales after his death shone bright Neither could they ever Remember the Scotish and English name to have been nearer Conjoyned than under the Last Kings Neither could old Hostility be more Commodiously abolished then if there were an Union made of both Nations upon Honest and Equal Conditions The Marriage was therefore Readily Assented unto and Conditions added by Mutual assent of both That the Scots should so long use their own Laws and Magistrates till such Children should be born of the same as were able to Reign And if none should happen to be procreated or being born should dye before their Lawful age Then the Kingdom of Scotland should go to the next of the Blood-Royal Things being thus Agreed Michael or as others mention Daevid Wemes and Michael Scot two Knights of Fife of great Repute for their Prudence with their Country in those Times were sent Embassadors to Norway but they because Margaret for that was the Young Ladies Name dyed before their Arrival returned home sad and nothing done by whose immature death there arose such Controversie as vehemently shook England and almost destroyed the Name of the Scots For to go on with the History as he and other Writers Relate it not withstanding this new Act of Intayling the Crown Ten Competitors arose to the Crown of Scotland notwithstanding the Act of Reviver making the same hereditary there arose Ten Competitors for the Succession Erick King of Norway Florence Earl of Holland Robert Bruce Earl of Anandale John de Baliol Lord of Galloway John de Hastings Lord of Abergaveny John Cumyn Lord of Badenair Patrick de Dunbar Earl of March John de Vesey Nicholas de Hues William de Ross All or the most part of them alledging themselves descended from David Earl of Huntingdon Younger Brother to William King of Scots and Great Uncle to the late King Alexander But the Principal and most Potent Factions which contended were that of Balyol and Bruce On which saith Sir Richard Baker Hist 96. broke out the Mortal Dissention between the Two Nations which consumed more Christian Blood and continued longer And the Wars between the Factions of Baliol and Bruce then any Quarrel we read of ever did between any Two People in the
Exercise of the same for the Publick safety 1 In regard the Entail being made to the Eldest Son by Act of Parliament the same declares that what is given by Act of Parliament may be taken by Act of Parliament and that every former Act inacted may by a latter Act be repealed according to the known Rule Vnumquodque dissolvitur eodem modo quo conflatum est Secondly according to the General Examples of Acts of Parliament amongst which nothing is more common than for later Acts to change the Entails of the Crown made by former Acts. Thirdly This Power of Parliaments is expresly declared by Act of Parl. 13 El. 1. still in force by which it is enacted that to affirm that the Laws and Statutes do not bind the Right of the Crown and the Descent Limitation Inheritance and Governance thereof is High Treason Fourthly All the Reason alledged of the Antient Custom of New Election of the Successor on every Descent is only lest the Eldest Son should happen to be an Infant or otherwise unfit for Government that the Parliament might choose the fittest which here is satisfied in the Eldest Son who is above all exception known to be the fittest who can be chosen Fifthly though this reserve of Power remain naturally in Parliaments to repeal and change former Acts concerning Succession by new Acts when there is just and necessary cause yet it is necessary likewise there should be a praevious Act to mark out the Heir in whose name the Parliament shall be called to declare the Succession or Guardianship if he happen to be an Infant And what if after a King happens to die there happen a Rebellion or Invasion which makes it impossible to assemble a Parliament will it not be a great safety to the People that a standing Act of Parliament hath before hand appointed the Successor to take care of the Kingdoms till he can call a Parliament to give their assistance therein There is nothing therefore can be justly excepted against these two Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland for ascertaining by Law the Eldest Son to be Heir to the Crown The excellency of the two said Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which ascertain the Succession of the Crown to the Kings Eldest Son But it were a great unthankfulness to the Providence of God to undervalue such Laws whereby all Accidents are obviated Questions and Doubts resolved and Objections answered by so few words as two Lines in each and the Peace of Succession preserved in Great Britain for so many hundred years which in other Empires and Kingdoms cannot be effected without those horrid Murders of Younger Brothers by Elder or Elder Brothers by Younger of lineal Heirs by collateral or collateral Heirs by lineal of Sons by Fathers or of Fathers by Sons whereby Civil Wars Devastations and Ruines of Kingdoms have ensued and that the want of such Statutes or the Breach of them have been causes of these Evils and Enjoyment of them hath been the Cure will I hope appear in the Objections and Answers following Objections first against the not being of the Kings Eldest Son within these Statutes answered Object Obj. 1. That the Lady his Mother was not a Queen therefore the Kings Eldest Son is not within the Statute Answ Statute false translated in the word Queen Answ To this the answer is easie and clear that the word Madame sa Compaigne are falsly translated our Lady his Queen and ought to have been translated our Lady his Companion which is proved by the Reasons following 1. Because 't is manifest sa Compaigne signifies not the word Queen in specie but any Lady Companion in general 2. Because it is manifest the makers of this Act of Parliament intended not to restrain their several meaning onely to a Queen for they knew Royne was French for Queen as well as Roy for King and if they had intended so could have more certainly and easily said Compas le mort nostre Seignior le Roy sa Royne than Madame sa Compaigne 3. Because at the time of making this Statute the famous Black Prince being the Eldest Son to Edward III. was married to Joan Daughter to Edmund Earl of Kent and had Issue by her Richard of Bourdeaux after King of England and none doubts but it was the intention of the King Edward III. who passionately affected his Grandchild Richard that in case the Princes Wife should happen to die in his life time whereby she should not have been a Queen but that notwithstanding if the Black Prince had happened to have survived him which he did not and been King his Eldest Son Richard should have benefit of this Statute 4. It would have been made doubtful by the Bishops who usurped then the Papal Supremacy over Princes of giving or refusing to give them Coronation when they pleased whether the Kings Wife should be titled Queen if the Bishop refused her Coronation Ralph of Canterbury refuseth to Crown Adeliza Queen unless he should first discrown the King as Ralph Archbishop of Canterbury did to Adeliza the second Wife of H. I. unless the Kings would suffer him to pull off the Crown first from the Kings head and new Crown him in acknowledgment that the Supremacy of the Coronation Office belonged to Ralph the Archbishop Bak. Hist 43. Touching which Office of Coronation of Kings and Queens that it belongs to Parliaments and not to Bishops and that David himself was both crowned and anointed by his Parliament and not by the Priest is shewn lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 169 c. 5. The Law of Saxons and Scots that no Wife of a King should be called Queen Because the Title of Queen was then under Envy and doubtful whether not against the antient Law both of England and Scotland the same not appearing to have been repealed by any Act of Parliament Bak. Hist fol. 6. saith a Law was made by the West Saxons that no Wife of a King should be called a Queen fol. 8. that it was so rigorously observed that when Ethelwolph had married Judith the Beautiful Daughter of the Emperour Charles the Bald in honour of whom in his own Court he ever placed her in a Chair of State with all other Majestical Complements of a Queen contrary to the Law of the West Saxons made to avoid the great Expence of Treasure incident to great Titles and Ceremonies and against other inconveniences and so much displeased his Lords thereby that they were ready to have Deposed him but were prevented by his death not long after Buchanan Rev. Scot. 407. takes notice of this Law and says Saxones lege caverunt ne ulla deinceps Regis Vxor Regina vocaretur aut in sede honoris in publico Regi assideret And 406. mentions the like Law in Scotland Quas Reginas alii suo quisque sermone nos Regum uxores appellamus nec altioris fastigii nomen ullum in iis agnoscimus
that have insued by disinheriting of Primogeniture either wholly or by Division of Succession into several Kingdoms have been Infinite Amongst the Persians Cyrus the younger Brother by the assistance of Parisatis the Queen Mother contending for Succession against Artaxerxes the eldest raised such Wars and drew in such Foreign Forces of Greeks as the same ceased not till himself was slain by the Army of Artaxerxes The Civil Wars between Hircamus the eldest and Aristobulus the younger Son could not be ceased till Pompey by the Roman Power restored the Kingdom to Hircanus the eldest Disinheriting the eldest Son causeth Patricides Matricides and Fratricides How many Patricides or Matricides or Fratricides this hath caused appears as to the first two by the Examples of Alphonsus the Tenth King of Castile of Gabriel the younger Son of the Marquess of Salusse who by assistance of his Mother cast his elder Brother into Prison pretending he was out of his Wits who breaking out of Prison recovered his Principality and having chased out his Brother Coupt up his Mother in the same Prison wherein she had before Coupt him The like appears in several Persians Turks and Africans And for Fratricides which it causeth Bodin Lib. 6. cap. 5.735 736. saith Foolishly therefore do those Parents who overcomed with the flattery of their younger Sons and disinheriting the elder of their Kingdom have incensed their Children most cruelly to Murder one another so as did the Father of Atreus and Thyestes who willing to prefer the younger before the elder as more sit to manage Affairs of State so silled and foyled his House with many Tragedies And not to seek farther from home we have seen all this Realm on sire with Civil Wars for that Lewis the Devout at the intreaty of his second Wife had preferred Charles the Bald before Lothayr his elder Brother wherefore Pope Pius the Second did wisely in Rejecting the Request of Charles the 7th the French King desirous to have preferred Charles his younger Son before Lewis the Eleventh his elder Brother howbeit that the King had Reason so to do considering that Lewis had without any just occasion twice taken Arms against him so to have taken from him the Crown and to have taken the Scepter out of his hand And as Bodin saith of France he need not look far from home so may we say of England we need not look far from home for the said Events of disinheriting Primogeniture For what caused all those cruel Wars between the House of York and Lancaster from Generation to Generation whereby the English lost both all their Conquests and Hereditary Possessions in France and so many Princes of the Blood and Nobles and Commons were slain but that the Line of a younger Brother contended to be preferred before the Line of an elder And have not as bad Effects happen'd when the Successions of Kingdoms have been joyn'd or divided to more Sons or Heirs than one Division of Kingdoms or part of them or of the Treasure from the eldest to younger Sons destructive to Kingdoms The Father of Jugurtha made him and his two Brothers Associates but he killed his two Brothers and took all himself Constantine divided the Empire to his three Sons they destroyed each other till one had all James King of Aragon appointed Peter his eldest Son to be King of Aragon and James his younger Son to be King of Majorca yet afterwards the elder Brother took the younger Prisoner and in Prison starved him So it befell also the Children of Botislaus the Second King of Polonia who having divided the Kingdom unto his four Sons and having left nothing unto his fifth kindled such a fire of Sedition as could not be after quench't without much Blood of his Subjects So William the Conqueror left the Dutchy of Normandy to Robert his eldest and England to William Rufus and his youngest Son Henry a Pension Robert after the Death of Rufus raising a War to recover his Right of Primogeniture in England from his younger Brother lost the Battel was taken Prisoner by Henry and deprived of his Sight cast into Prison and there died miserably It had been safe therefore for the Preservation of his House and Kingdom to have left the Dominions intirely to the eldest and to have left not one only but both his younger Sons Pensions A multitude of other Examples there are of the ill success where Primogeniture is deprived not only of the whole but of any considerable-part or member of the Inheritance either in Land or Treasure which appears in the forementioned example of the Treasure and fenced Cities given to the younger Sons of Jehosophat therefore destroyed by the eldest Primogeniture not to have the same Prerogative in Private Families as in Kingdoms 2 Chro. 21.2 3 4. Which is to be intended only of Succession to Kingdoms And as to private Families both Equity and Policy is clean contrary and that there ought not to be left above a Scripture double Portion to the eldest where there are more than one which is agreeable with the Examples of most Nations Certificates introduce forein Laws and destroy the Laws of the Land 21. The Certificate Introduces foreign Laws and destroys Magna Charta and the Petition of Right The Foreign Laws it introduces on the Subjects as to Marriage Filiation and Succession and Religion and Liberty and Propriety all thereon depending have been already mentioned are the Imperial and French and of the Council of Trent That by the Ceremony of a Priest in a Temple the Adulterous Children of the Wife shall disinherit the Natural Children of the Husband The Trent Law That all Marriages without that Ceremony shall be Null and void and the Children Illegitimate The French Foppery That Natural Children shall not be Natural Children Excommunication Penance Absolution Commutation-Money twice punishing for one Offence and many other Popish foreign Laws all which destroy Magna Charta and the Petition of Right and are inconsistent with the Protestant Religion Liberty and Propriety Praemunire incurred by Certificates 22. That the Certificate Episcopal Introducing such foreign Laws incurr a Praemunire is proved before in the Case of Cardinal Woolsey Lib. 1. cap. 5.37 38. High Treason incurred by Certificates 23. The Certificate if it imposes those Foreign Imperial Papal French or Trent Laws of Marriage or Filiation on the Succession of the Crown or Certifie the King's eldest Son not to be Heir contrary to this Statute of 25 E. 3. incurrs the Penalty of High Treason Certificates not to be traversed or diputed nor under Appeal 24. The Certificate though utterly false and unjust is neither Traversable nor admits Probation to the Contrary nor is under Appeal either of Fact or Law nor is he bound to give any Reason of it But Sie volo sic Jubeo stat pro Ratione voluntas Of which see more at large Lib. 2. p. 175 176 177 178 179. 25. The Certificate causeth
First Because the Exiling or Disinheriting the King's eldest Son indangers the King himself Secondly Because to compass the Exile compasseth the Death of the eldest Son by depriving him of the King's Protection and exposing him to Poison or Assassination of his Enemies and to compass to Disinherit him is a manifest design to destroy him without which his Inheritance cannot be taken from him as Matth. 21.38 They said amongst themselves this is the Heir come let us kill him and let us seize on his inheritance And they caught him and cast him out of the Vinyard and slew him Object 8 Obj. 8. The Son of a King born after he is King is to be prefer'd in Succession before the Son of a King born while he is Prince And of this there are many Examples as Henry the First being the youngest Son of William the Conqueror Born when a Prince and born when a King standing in Competition for the Crown of England against Robert Duke of Normandy his elder Brother made this one of his Objections That Robert was born when his Father was but a Duke but Henry was born when his Father was a King and therefore obtained the Kingdom against Robert his eldest Brother And it is recited by Grot. de Jur. Bel. Pac. p. 171. That the like passed in Persia between Cyrus and Arsica in Judea between Antipater the Son of Herod the Great and his Brother in Hungary when Geissa obtained the Kingdom in Germany between Otto the First and Henry though not without Arms and likewise the same Question was between Xerxes and his Brother Atabarzanes and between Artaxerxes Mnemon and Cyrus the Sons of Darius and Parisatis Artaxerxes being the elder but born during the Private fortune of Darius and the like happened between Bajazet and Zemez contending for the Turkish Empire and many others Answ These were put to the Tryal of Battel and for the greatest part the eldest Son had the Success but if it had been otherwise the Event of War is no Rule of Justice and if it had been without War yet where there is a standing Act of Parliament Judicandum est Legibus non Examplis And this Act of Parliament was made to prevent the present and all other Accidents which might happen to disturb the Peace of Succession of the Kingdom and raise Civil Wars which it could not do without all other Sons and Heirs to the eldest Son and there being no other Son mentioned in the Letter of the Statute but the eldest and not a word of Distinction whether born before or after the Father's obtaining the Kingdom Vbi lex non distinguit ibi nec nos distinguere debemus for then the same mischiefs would insue beforementioned of extending a Statute of Treason by Equity which leaves Treason arbitrary to every Judge who will assume to declare it beyond the Letter and to insert as many kinds of Sons and Heirs as he pleased which would make the Law and all the Care and Wisdom of it in ascertaining the Son Heir to be of no Effect and leave the Kingdom in a dangerous Condition that every Prince Married in his Father's life-time and having then some Children and after his Father's Death others might occasion a Civil War who should succeed to the Crown when he died Object 9 Obj. 9. The next Objection That the King 's eldest Son is not yet Declared Prince of Wales or Prince of the Scots The Original of this Title used to be given to the eldest Sons of the Kings of England was from Henry the Third who gave his eldest Son Edward who was afterward King Edward the First on his Marriage to Elianor the Daughter of Spain amongst other Principalities in France England and Ireland likewise that of Wales Hinc natum ut deinceps unusquisque Rex qui secutus est filium majorem natu principem Walliae facere consuevit And in continuance of this Custom Anno 1610. Prince Henry the eldest Son of King James was solemnly created Prince of Wales by his Father As to the Title designing the Prince of Scotland to be next Successor or Heir apparent it seems to have been by their Investiture of Cumberland for saith Buchanan Rer. Scot. lib. 6. p. 175. That Constantine the Third in the Tenth year of his Reign Milcolumbo proximo Regis filio Cumbriam donavit qui honos velut Augurium Argumentum erat eum proxime regnaturum Ac deinceps in proximis aliquot Regibus id fuisse observaturum manifesta adversus veterem Comitiorum rationem fraude quae omnem Liberorum susfragiorum vim prope tollerit non minus quà m Cossâ—à Caesaribus Designatio Constantine the Third in the Tenth year of his Reign gave Cumberland to Malcoliâ— the Son of the last King which Honour was as it were the Inauguration or Sign of him who was next to succeed in the Kingdom and was after observed by some of the next Kings to that end to take away by Fraud the free Election by Parliament no less than did the Designations of the Consuls by the Caesars and after p. 189. he sath That Kenneth the Third being King by Election of the People to make the Kingdom Hereditary to his own Son Malcolm finding it an Impediment in his way that his Brother Duffus his Son Malcolm Cumbriae tum praefectus erat quam Regionem Scoti beneficio Regum Anglorum it a tenebant ut Cumbriae Praefectura velut omen Regni esset atque ita jam per aliquot aetates observatum erat was then Governor of Cumberland which Region the Scots held by Gift from the Kings of England to that intent that the Presidentship of Cumberland should be for a Sign who should be next Successor to the Kingdom and so for divers Ages the same hath accordingly been observed he to inherit his own Poisoned his Brother's Son and p. 190. he saith Milcolumbus regis filius in natura adhuc ad rerum administrationem aetate Cumbriae praefectus et princeps Scotorum est Declaratus quod nomen perinde est Scotis atque apud Gallos Delfinus apud priores Romanorum Imperatores Caesar apud posterio res Rex Romanorum quibus omnibus Successor superiori Magistratui dari intelligitur Malcolm the King's Son in an unripe Age for Publick Affairs is declared President of Cumberland and Prince of the Scots which Name is with the Scots Equipollent to the Daulphin amongst the French to Caesar amongst the Ancient Romans and amongst the Modern to the King of the Romans by all which Titles the Successor to the Superiour Magistracy is understood but notwithstanding for the most part this hath been the Custom yet it hath been likewise often omitted and Admit it had not yet there being no Law requiring it there is no pretence that such Omissions makes any incapacity in the Heir to succeed at Common Law or to be within this Statute for the Statute making no Distinction between the King 's eldest Son when
the King 's eldest Son or against the Jus Coronae and this Act of Parliament of 25 E. 3. Cap. 2. De Productionibus as not to understand the same Slanders Militate against the Marriages and Legitimations of themselves their own Mothers Wives and Children or not to know what pretence or Power they put into the hands of Popes and Bishops to disinherit and dispose of the Successors and Succession of the Crown they give them a greater Power to disinherit and dispose at will of their own Inheritances Wives and Children and by forsaking the Moral Law of God of Marriages and Legitimations and Idozing the Ceremonial Laws Papal or Episcopal drive themselves into this inevitable Dilemma either to fall into the hands of a Papist Successor who will assuredly destroy all Married Priests and Ecclesiasticks their Wives and Children and Successors and make a prey of all they have or to fall into hands of Justice as the fruits of Folly and Treason in slandering the right of a Protestant Successor Of the Insolent Absurdity of Popish Laws disinheriting the Lawful Sons of Kings by the Law of God and Inheriting the Bastards of Popes by the Law of the Devil The Scripture saith Galat. 4.7 If a Son then an Heir that is to say to the Father who begot him and not to a Fictitious Father But the Popish Law or what is above it the Practique saith Let none be an Heir of a Marriage not Contracted by a Priest in a Temple except a Bastard of a Pope in which the Law of New Rome follows that of old Pagan Rome which prohibited some kind of Women to the Subjects but gave Authority to Caesar to lye with what Women he would And the like to the Romish false Prophet is imitated by the false Prophet Mahomet who in his Alchoran prohibited divers Women to the people but counterfeits God speaking to himself and saying But as for thee O Prophet thou may'st Lye with what Women thou wilt But in this the Pope goes beyond Mahomet for the one Illegitimates no Children nor disinherits them but the other all of Women not Churched except his own So Pope Paul the Fifth is related to have gotten out of his Leaden Bulls in a small time Twenty hundred Thousand Scutes of Gold with all which he bought Lands for his Bastards and Pope Sextus the Fifth being himself the Son of a Swineheard created his Bastard a Cardinal and gave him Ten Thousand Crowns per Annum Revenue and besides Left at his Death Ten Millions of Treasure Another Pope gave his Bastard the Kingdom of Sicily and divers Principalities of Italy and a vast heap of Treasure Pope Alexander the Sixth intended likewise to have given his Bastard Son Caesar Borgia a Kingdom whom though the veriest Villain in the World Matchiavel in his Treatise De Principe proposeth as the only Example for Kings to imitate And by Probability a Kingdom he had obtained had he not and his Father by the just Judgment of God been Poisoned by the same invenomed Wine at a Banquet which they had prepared for others All Italy is already over-stocked and the Principallities thereof and of other Catholick Countries in time likely to be the Inheritances of none but of the Bastards of Popes and their Descendents Male or Female under the Name of Nephews and Neices and by the Matches of Papal Descendents into Protestant Dominions the like Evil may be justly feared if not prevented and what is worse a perpetuating thereby of their Superstition from Generation to Generation The Scripture likewise saith Heb. 13.4 Marriage is honourable in all and the bed undefiled but Whoremongers and Adulterers God shall Judge But the Popish Law saith no Marriages are Honourable made by the Law of God unless made by the Papal Laws nor the Children nor Chastity nor the Bed undefiled nor the Sons though of Kings descending from the same according to the Foundation of all Honour the Immaculate Law of God But the Bastards of Popes such is the Impudence of the Whore of Babylon to Prohibit Honour to all except her self and her Brats And as to these Pope Eugenius the Second Usurped the Authority when he pleased to create them Kings Dukes Earls and Knights and hath plagued and incumbred the World with fictitious Titles of Honour but he vouchsafes the lawful Sons of Kings no better Title than Base Sons except they receive from him the mark of the Beast This is not strange that Swineheard Popes and their Trulls should not only not disinherit nor degrade their own Blood but extol the same above the Imperial But 't is strange that any Christian Emperors and Princes should have ever been so Pope or Priest-Ridden or so far have suffer'd them to have set their foot on their Necks as to Kick from their Heads the Crowns and Honours of them and their Sons for the Bastards of Popes to inherit and to disinherit their own for which not only his Holiness himself derides them but they become a Derision to Jews Turks and all the World besides none of them being so foolish to admit the Doctrine of Devils of Prohibiting Marriages not Prohibited by God amongst them or Illegitimating the Children of such Marriages Lastly It is already proved That Carnal Knowledge Chastity and Childbirth makes a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble by the Law of God between all persons not prohibited And it is notorious That Popes have kept openly their Whores and their Bastards and Rule what they call their Holy Church by them So did Theodora the Impudent Concubine of the Duke of Tuscany rule all Rome and gave her Daughter Marozia as wicked a Queen as her Mother to be Concubine to Pope Sergius the Third of whom he begot him who was afterwards his Bastard Pope John the Twelfth the Mother Marozia poisoned Pope Leo 6. and Pope Stephen 7. And got her Bastard Boy to be Pope John the Twelfth Pope John the Thirteenth was deposed in Council Anno 961 for abusing his Father's Concubines for Gelding some Men and putting out the Eyes of others for Drinking a health to the Devil c. Pope Clement the Fifth was a Common Fornicator and it is Notorious That all Popes are Panders-General of all the Stews and Houses of Fornication in Rome and fill their Treasuries with the hires of Whores And are these fit Fellows to make Marriages Holy or to make Laws to overthrow God's Holy Ordinance and dispose thereby of the Succession of Protestant Kingdoms LIB III. CHAP. II. Whether Necessary in the present Juncture of Affairs for the King and Parliament to declare a Protestant Successor to the Three Kingdoms of England Scotland and Ireland TO prepare which Question for the Consideration of Supream Authority it will be necessary first to recite the Objections which are made for the Negative And then the Reasons which are brought for the Affirmative Object 1. Declaring a Successor by the King and Parliament makes the Kingdom Elective and not Hereditary
Answ 'T is acknowledged if the Declaration were to be by the Parliament Sole without the King it might possible make a Kingdom Elective but where by Law the King hath a Negative and the Declaration is not made without his Consent it is otherwise for it is sufficient to make a Kingdom Hereditary if the Law make it descendible to the King's Heirs in Case it be not otherwise by the King himself and Parliament actually disposed of which is seldom done and in Cases of Necessity But yet are they not disabled of the Power to do it when they think necessary as a private Inheritance doth not therefore cease to be Hereditary because the Owner hath Power to Give Sell Alien or otherwise dispose of it 't is sufficient if by Law it descend to his own Heirs unless he Actually happen according to Law to dispose of it from them Obj. 2. Declarations by Act of Parliament are in vain Because Acts of Precedent Parliaments cannot bind the Power of a subsequent Parliament which is shewn by divers Examples Cok. 4 Part. fol. 42. And Grotius speaks to the same intent That Kings Predecessors cannot bind Kings Successors Est autem causa Successionis non subjecta Regi nunc regnanti quod inde apparet quod Rex nunc regnans nulla lege obligare potest Successorem Successio enim Imperii non est de Jure Imperii ac proinde mansit in statn naturali quo nulla erat Jurisdictio Grot. de Jure Bell. Pacis lib. 2. cap. 7. p. 171. That a cause of Succession is not subject to the King now Reigning appears from this that a King now Reigning can by no Law bind his Successor for the Succession to Empire is not of the Right of Empire But the same remains in the state of Nature wherein there was no Jurisdiction Answ Though a King and Parliament present by declaring a Successor cannot bind a Parliament future but they may again Repeal or Abrogate such present Act of Declaration yet doth it not follow that the present Act of Declaration is vain and of no use For first Then by the same Reason it might be said that Magna Charta and the Petition of Right And all the Acts of Parliament we have are vain and of no use because future Parliaments have Power to repeal them notwithstanding which it is manifest such an Act of Declaration would be of great Use and Benefit Secondly An Act though repealable is not vain because such an Act cannot pass without the Major number of Votes which will be an Incouragement to the major number to continue their indeavour to preserve And a Discouragement to the minor part in another Parliament to attempt to repeal Thirdly Because succeeding Parliaments have a Reverence to preceding and though they have Power to repeal yet do they not use to repeal to the utmost of their Power nor can a former Act be repealed but by another Parliament which if a Protestant Successor is Declared must be called by him and he hath then a sufficient Legal Power to Exclude so far Papists from Elections of Members of Parliament as probably they will have no Power to repeal former Protestant Acts. Fourthly Subsequent Parliaments cannot repeal the Act of a Precedent quoad praeterita for which reason the whole People will act with far greater Courage both in Peace and War in Execution of whatsoever they have a standing Act of Parliament to protect them than where there is none Fifthly Such an Act doth leave the Successor and his Parliament in a Posture and Possession of Arms Lawfully to defend his own Right and the Protestant Religion both against Secret Massacres and Open Rebellions and Invasions by Papists Object 3. Acts of Parliament cannot bind the Power of the Sword or Armies in the Field Answ Though they canot bind such as are Actually Convented without raising other Armies against them Prevents though it binds not the Power of the Sword yet they may take ways both to prevent their Convention and to raise other Armies against them if Convenient and the Success must be left to God Object 4. That a Successor Declared Declaring incites not a Lineal but a Collateral Heir to Rebel and not an eldest Son but a younger wrongfully present before him may prove Rebellious or Disobedient Answ This Objection is made 28 H. 8. cap. 7. But it makes no Danger of it except only in Case it should happen to be of a Collateral Heir when the King should have no Lineal Heir of his Body Concerning which Collateral Heir only and not his Lineal These are the words of the Statute by way of Petition from the Parliament to the King And if your Grace afore it may be certainly known whether ye shall have Heirs or no should suddenly name or declare any Person or Persons to succeed after your Decease and for lack of Heirs of your Body lawfully begotten into the Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of this Realm then it is to be doubted that such Persons that should be named might happen to take great heart and Courage and by Presumption fall into inobedience and Rebellion by Occasion of which Premisses great Divisions and Dissentions may be and is very likely to Arise and Spring in this Realm to the great Peril and Destruction of us Your Majesties most humble and obedient Subjects and of all our Posterities Whereby it appears This Statute is only afraid of Declaring Collateral Heirs If there should be no Lineal Heir of the Body or they should fail In like manner Queen Elizabeth having no Lineal Heir of her Body was afraid to declare the Collateral But she declared the Natural Heirs of her Body should Succeed as appears 13 Eliz. 1. which are the next Lineal and not Collateral Heirs And the Example of Christian Princes in like manner hath been never to Scruple the Natural affection of their own Natural eldest Sons to declare them Successor after their Death for that gives them no Greater present Power than they had before The Heir as is said Gal. 4.1 Differeth nothing from a Servant So Edward the Third did not doubt to Declare his Eldest Son the Famous Black Prince his Successor by the General name of his Eldest Son in this Statute nor likewise by making him Prince of Wales to declare him by name his Heir Apparent and Successor nor did he ever the less Trust him with the Command of great Armies in France with whom he was Victorious yet did the Son so declared never presume to any higher Title than Prince of Wales nor Motto than Ich Dien I serve as if he studied how to testifie his Obedience to God and his Father and to shew that the Heir differeth nothing from a Servant In like manner did the Old Roman Emperors declare their Eldest Sons Caesars and Principes Juventis The Modern Emperors theirs Kings of the Romans The Kings of England theirs Princes of Wales The Kings of Scotland
Sons of Zerujah were too hard for her so it was an easie matter for Queen Mary who was a Papist Successor to lose Callice to the French The Possession of Callice once lost could not be again recovered which was done by King Philip's drawing out the Strength of the English Garrison Souldiers in his Wars against other Towns and the neglect of the Queens Council to send Recruits until too late though they had notice of a Seige intended against them The Town of Callice which was first taken by Edward the Third after Eleven Months Siege was esteemed of so high Import that on a Treaty of Marriage by King Edward between his Nephew Richard of Burdeaux and Mary a Daughter of Charles the French King Charles made an offer to King Edward to leave him Fourteen hundred Towns and Three thousand Fortresses in Aquitain upon Condition he would render Callice and all that he held in Picardy But before any thing could be concluded King Edward died And the Lord de Cordes a French Lord would commonly say He would be content to lye in Hell seven years so that Callice were in the French Possession Bak. Hist 240. But it seems since they got it in possession some of them would be content to lie in Hell for ever if Perjury will lay them there so long For there being Anno Dom. 1559. in the First year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth a Treaty of Peace between her and the French King and Commissioners of both sides to that end appointed and the Commissioners meeting accordingly the Chief point in difference was the Restitution of Callice for which the English Commissioners by the Queens Appointment offered to remit Two Millions of Crowns that by just Accompt were due from France to England At last on much Altercation it was Concluded and Agreed Perjury in the French King in not restoring Callice That Callice should remain in possession of the French for the term of Eight years and those Expired it should be delivered unto the English upon the forfeiture of Five hundred thousand Crowns for which Hostages were given But all this notwithstanding though the Conditions were Sealed and Sworn to and though Hostages were assigned to remain in England till one or other were performed yet all was frustrate and came to nothing Bak. Hist 351. So little Faith is there in the Oath of a Papist Prince And the same Danger will be in the delivering the possessions of Garrisons Forts in England to Papists or Papist Successor though on Conditions Sworn to by them the same difficulty yea impossibility for a Protestant Successor to recover again the Possession of Treasure Arms Offices Religion Liberty Propriety as it is of Life it self when once left to a papist Successor though he take an Oath to preserve all these By which and all former Examples appears That a papist Successor if he happen to be is of great Danger and Mischief to all Lay-papists themselves but totally and inevitably Destructive to all Protestants See other Examples of Perjury by Popes Bishops and Papist Princes before Lib. 2. p. 377. Of the Destruction double to Protestants if the Crown happen to fall to a Papist Successor Female and not prevented as before Destruction double to Protestants in a Papist Successor Female It is before spoken of the Destruction inevitable must follow to Protestants if a Male Papist Successor happen But if a Female happen it must be doubly Destructive for she will Marry a Foreign Papist Prince so the Protestants will be left naked and exposed to the rage and Cruelties both of a Papist and a Foreign Sword Hath not God given us already warning fresh in Memory in the late Examples of Queen Mary of England and Queen Mary of Scotland one of whom Married King Philip of Spain the other was sold by Cardinal Beton and Married to the French Dauphin And did not God even by Miracle though we most unthankfully so soon forget it Catch this Island as a Brand kindled at both ends out of the Fire Protestants barr'd of Succession to Papists by Salique Laws yet are not Papists barr'd to succeed to Protestants and hath he in vain given Sense and Reason and Strength to the Dull Protestants so far to tempt him and provoke his Judgment as to cast it thither again while the busie Papist hath barr'd all his Doors of Succession with his Laws against Hereticks and his Salique Laws to exclude alike both Female and Male Protestants 10. The next Danger is If no Successor should be Declared by the King and Parliament in regard of Foreign Princes 10. Danger of Foreign Princes That Danger is likewise very well expressed in the Statute 25 H. 8. Cap. 22. To have been the cause of great Bloodshed in this Realm and to be one of the Causes why the King desired to declare his Successor by Act of Parliament as appears in these words viz. And sometimes other Foreign Princes and Potentates of sundry Degrees minding rather Dissentions and Discord ot continue in this Realm to the utter Desolation thereof than Charity Equity and Vnity have many times supported wrong Titles whereby they might more easily and facily aspire to the Superiority of the same The continuance and sufferance whereof deeply considered and pondered were too Dangerous and Perillous to be suffered within this Realm any longer and too much contrary to the Vnity Peace and Tranquility of the same being greatly Reproachable and Dishonourable to the whole Realm The not Declaring Edgar Atheling Successor by Act of Parliament in the Life of Edward the Confessor William the Conqueror let in by not Declaring Edgar Atheling Successor let in the Foreign pretence of William the Conqueror which if it had been done 't is probable that never any Norman Invador had dared to have set his foot on English Ground So 't is probable the King of Spain had never been able to have seized on the Crown of Portugal had not the Superstitious Portuguese inslaved their Blood Royal to be Judged by the Papal and Episcopal Laws of Marriage and Succession contrary to the Moral Law of God whereby they left it in the Power of Popes or Bishops if the Spaniard or any other Papist Prince would give or promise them Money to Legitimate or Illegitimate whom they would and sell the Succession to the Kingdom at what rate they pleased Philip the Second of Spain seized the Crown of Portugal by the not Declaring Don Antonio Successor for as appears in that Judicious Author though Anonymus who writes The interest of Princes p. 95. The Case was this Henry the Third Son of Emanuel being according to the Papal Law Heir to the Crown of Portugal was accordingly Crowned Anno Dom. 1578. And being an Old Man without Children sensible of the Disputes would arise after his Death about the Succession erected a Judicature to hear and Determine the several Claims pretending to the same Of
can only be understood where there is a Necessity and no Remedy But where God is pleased to offer a just King and a just Parliament to Judge equally there is no Necessity of using any unjust means though to obtain Right 3. If a Prince buy not with ready Money or Donatives given in Possession but oblige himself in future Promises if he obtain the Kingdom the Mercenaries are so many who will expect to be promised and their Nature so unsatiable That no Prince can be so rich who is to obtain nor can any Kingdom be so rich when it is obtained as to be able to satisfie a small part of them and who fail of their Expectation turn Enemies As Rich. 3. promised the Duke of Buckingham if he obtained the Kingdom very great Rewards but after he was King failed to perform the same the Duke of Buckingham became his Mortal Enemy and King Richard paid his Promises by cutting him off for Treason when he had first ruined Richard by laying the Plot for Henry the Seventh 4. If the Kingdoms are left exposed to Sale a Papist Successor will be richer than a Protestant and so carry it by Money though not by Right Impoverisheth the Prince 5. It impoverisheth and weakens the Prince and his Posterity So the German Emperors have impoverished and weakened themselves by giving away so many Royalties to 7 Electors to buy them in Elections That the Electors are greater than they The Mischiefs as to the People are Mischiefs of buying Crowns to the Subject 1. The Sale of the Successions of the Three Kingdoms and buying of them Destroys all Religion and Justice among the People for your Kingdom-Sellers usually receive a great share of their Money out of the Power they Contract to have of the Sale of all Publick Offices of Gain both Ecclesiastical and Temporal If therefore Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Persons buy their Offices they will neither Form nor Preach any Divinity but for Gain If Temporal Judges or other Judicial or Ministerial Officers buy their Offices those who buy will sell and take Bribes and none shall have Justice unless he buys In Turky all the great Officers buy their Places of the Grand Seignior whereby they run themselves into great Debts which they rake out again of the poor People by all manner of Rapine and Oppression And though the fame is of the Great Turk's great Severity on the Bribery of Judges yet no Courts in the World are more corrupt for that Vice than they For what colour can the Emperor have to punish those Thieves to whom he himself is accessary by selling their Licences to Rob at so dear a rate as he usually puts them to buy and will afterward take the whole spoil if it grow to any bulk 2. The Exchequer will be ingaged under unsupportable Debts and charged with Pensions to a Multitude of Pretended Claimants of Promises which will totally exhaust the Publick Treasure load the People with insupportable Burdens and Taxes and destroy all the Military Defence of the Kingdoms by Sea and Land for want of Pay 3. Kingdom-Sellers will usually have Commissions to take all Penalties on the Penal Statutes to Dispense and Pardon Offences against those Statutes and to Pardon or make Composition for the Penalties which Penal Statutes concerning both Religion Justice Trade Military Affairs and the whole Policy of the Kingdom will be totally subverted by Money by such said Kingdom-Sellers It Exposes the Kingdom to Conquest 16. Danger of exposing this Kingdom to Conquest For if a Successor is not declared by King and Parliament a Multitude of Competitors may arise and having no Judge of greater Power than themselves do try their right by Battel and Civil Wars wherein he who Joyns will declare himself a Conqueror from which these two Mischiefs will arise 1. There cannot be a free Parliament for the Sword will awe and over-power the Elections both of Burgesses and Knights and when they come to sit the greatest part of the Members will be Military Officers The Conqueror will grant no Law except for Money and the Army will have a Negative Vote on the Parliament 2. All the Nation especially the Rich and Noble which happen to be of the side that is Vanquished whether right or wrong will be either Fined or Confiscated and many of their lives taken by their own Brethren of the same Religion and Nation and therefore it most concerns the Nobles and not the Poor to prevent Civil War as is visible in all the Victories obtained between the Houses of York and Lancaster wherein both Princes and Nobles destroyed one another and set up their Heads upon Poles by turns And it was the usual saying of Edward the Fourth in all the Battels he fought Kill the Nobles but save the People Some further Examples of declaring Successors by Parliament Some further Examples of declaring Successors follow besides what before mentioned To this purpose of declaring a Successor by Parliament Grot. de Jur. Bel. Pac. 111. says Sic Euphaes Rex Messeniis permisit dispicere quem ex Regali Aepitidarum genere Regnaret Et de Xerxis Artabarzanis Controversia Populus Cognovit Et 179 sive in conventu ordinum ut factum in Anglia Scotia teste Cambdeno sive per Delegatos ad id Negotium ut factum in Aragonia teste Mariana lib. 20. So King Euphaes permitted the Messenians to consider who ought to Reign of the Royal race of Epitidae And the People of Persia had Conusans of the Controversie between Xerxes and Artabarzanes Or the same is determined in Parliament as Cambden testifies is done in England and Scotland or by Delegates of the People as Mariana testifies lib. 20. was done in Aragon So King Edward the Third the Wise Author of this great Statute whereon this Discourse hath proceeded to prevent Civil Wars on any doubt arising on Succession to the Crown not only declared his eldest Son by this Statute but likewise he happening to Die in his Father's Life-time caused to prevent all farther Scruples his Grandchild Richard of Bourdeaux to be declared Successor by Act of Parliament Moses Declares a Successor Moses being told that he should die Numb 27.15 desireth God to declare a Successor And Moses spake unto the Lord saying Let the Lord the God of the spirits of all flesh set a Man over the Congregation which may go out before them and which may go in before them and which may send them out and which may bring them in That the Congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepheard And the Lord said unto Moses Take thee Joshua the Son of Nun a Man in whom is the Spirit and lay thine hand upon him and set him before Eleazer the Priest and before all the Congregation and give him a Charge in their sight and thou shalt put some of thine Honour upon him that all the Congregation of the Children of
Cohabitation 3. No lawful Impediment why the Parties should not Marry 4. Chastity and Children 5. Length of time and no Judicial Questioning and Sentence to the contrary while alive 7. Promise of Marriage 8. Acknowledgment by the Father of the Children either by word or writing or by giving them Aliment and Education as Children As to the First Fame and Reputation which are Voces opinio Vulgi are an usual Presumption of Marriage As to the Second The Cannon Law it self Jus Pontificium praesumit ex diuturna Cohabitatione filium esse Legitimum Craig Feud 270. Cohabitation for any time is so high a Presumption of Marriage as it Legitimates the Son And amongst the Old Romans one of their chief ways of Lawful Marriage without Ceremony of Priest or Temple was Vsus that is Cohabitation and Conjugal Society for the space of a year and this was reputed so considerable a time as it made a Marriage by Prescription As to the Third which is where there is no Lawful Impediment nor the Parties are prohibited by the Law of God to Marry this makes a presumption of Marriage because it was no Sin for them by the Law of God to Marry As to the Fourth cause of Presumption which is Chastity and Children where all the Circumstances concur of Lawful Marriage as Cohabitation no Lawful Impediment Chastity of the Lady Children and acknowledgment by the Father of the Children to be his these are not only the strongest presumptions which can be made of a Lawful Marriage but are of themselves as is fully proved in the following Discourse without any Ceremony a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble As to the Fifth cause of presumption which is no Judicial Questioning and Sentence against the Marriage in the space of Thirty years in which time all Witnesses may be Dead and Writings lost or burnt the same is so high as by the Laws of the Land and of all Nations no proof ought to be admitted to the contrary nor no questioning now to be permitted of the same because it is beyond the time of Limitation of Actions and the peace and security of all Families and Kingdoms must be destroyed should Witnesses be required Thirty years after of all such Marriages as have not been Judicially question'd and sentenced in all that time As to the Sixth cause of presumption which is the Death of either Party without being Judicially question'd or sentenced while alive This by the Law of God and of the Land is so high a presumption for the Parents and so necessary justice for the Children That no Probation ought to be admitted to the contrary nor ought or can the Legitimation of the Child be question'd after the Death of either Parent yea though the Marriage of the Parents were Unlawful as if a man Marry his own Sister which is a far more Unlawful Marriage than to Marry without a Papal or Episcopal Ceremony and have Issue by her if she die before a Judicial hearing and sentence pass'd against her her Children are Inheritable and their Legitimation can never be question'd for she that is Deceased cannot be Summon'd before any Humane Tribunal And if Sentence should be there pass'd against her she is condemn'd without Hearing and therefore that the Children ought to be Legitimate and Inheritable hath been resolved by the Parliament it self as may appear Bro. Deraignement 5. Bro. Bastardy 23.44 24 H. 8. 39 E. 3.32 And it is for the same reason very clear That if Queen Katherine the Wife of H. 8. had died before Judicial Sentence pass'd against her the Legitimation of his Daughter by her who was afterwards Queen Mary could never have been question'd and should the Legitimation of the Royal Lines of England Scotland and Ireland or any other Kingdom in the World be permitted to be question'd after the Death of one or both of the Parents It is impossible but all certainty and security of the Successions to them must be utterly destroyed As to the Seventh cause of presumption which is presumption of a Promise of Marriage to shew which all the foremention'd circumstances concur and though the Ecclesiasticks of Scotland keep the people under sufficient servility of their Ceremonies of Marriage yet even thereby the Laws of the Land doth promise of Marriage without any Proclamation of Banns or other Ceremony both Endow the Mother and Legitimate the Children as appears Craig Feud 269.270 As to the last Cause of Presumption which is Filiation not only the Civil Law but the Law of God in the Scripture Legitimates every Son and makes him Heir to the Father who begot him either of a Primogenial or Filial Portion except of Inheritance intail'd to a former Wife as was that of Abraham to Sarah and whether this Probation of Filiation is made by the Son or Father as in the Civil Law is said Filium alicujus se esse probans videtur probare se esse Legitimum § Et ib. ad Marg. de Adopt who proves himself a Son to any proves himself Legitimate And by the same Law such as are proved Children are Legitimated though there were no Ceremonies of Marriage Authen Collation 6. Novella 174. Tit. 3. quibus modis Natur. cap. primo Siquis 3530. And the Scripture is Positive in the point Rom. 8.17 If Children then Heirs Et Gal. 4.7 If a Son then an Heir 5. To return again to other Laws of the Land besides those of Presumptions It is not necessary to prove a Lawful Marriage by proving Ceremonies But all Marriage is declared Lawful whether with or without Ceremonies by the Doctrine of the Church of England and the Law of the Land which is not Prohibited by the Law of God as appears by the 32 Art of the 39 Articles Roger's Articles p. 185. 187 188. as shewn more at large in the Discourse following and likewise in the Statute 32 H. 8. cap. 38. of Precontracts wherein there is this Clause And that no Reservation or Prohibition God's Law except shall Trouble or Impeach any Marriage without the Levitical Degrees Whereby it is clear that this Marriage being without the Levitical Degrees and not Prohibited by the Law of God ought not by the express words of the Act of Parliament to be troubled or impeach'd by any Humane Law whatsoever Ecclesiastical or Temporal Which said Act of Parliament except as to matter of Pre-contracts stands unrepealed to this Day and of full force And the Reasons of the said Act are expressed in the Preamble of the same to be because the Usurped Power of the Bishop of Rome hath always intangled and troubled the meer Jurisdiction and Regal Power of this Realm of England and also unquieted much the Subjects of the same by his Usurped Power in them and by making that Unlawful which by God's Word is Lawful both in Marriages and other things 6. They whom no Law of the Land makes Illegitimate are Legitimate by the Law of the Land But no Law of the Land either
Canterbury cannot be sent unto to certifie because it was made Beyond-sea the Foreign Catholick Bishop cannot be sent unto to certifie because he is out of the Jurisdiction And besides by Acts of Parliament all Foreign Certificates and all other Foreign Acts of Jurisdiction from the Bishop of Rome or any other Foreign Bishop ought not to be admitted here besides no Foreign Witness can either be Summon'd to appear here or to be examin'd there So as to the Fact of Ceremonies were they never so many at the Marriage they are impossible to be brought to an equal Tryal or Probation here and the Ceremony that 't was in a Church consecrated by a Bishop for as Coke says no House can be a Church without such Consecration which is impossible to be Sworn by any Witness For none but God can make place or time Holy and not a Bishop there remains therefore nothing which ought or can as to the Fact of Marriage be proved here but the Substance of Marriage which is Cohabitation Conjugal Society Chastity and Children which are Notorious and need no Foreign Witnesses Then as to to the Law of the Ceremonies the Protestant Ceremonies of Marriage are by the Law in a Catholick Country Heresie and forbidden The Catholick Ceremonies are forbidden here These Ceremonies therefore in a Foreign Marriage can neither be judged here by the Law of the Catholick Country because it concerns Inheritance which lyes in England nor by the Law of England because the Fact was done in a Foreign County it ought therefore only to be judged by the Moral Law of God which judgeth according to Substance and not Ceremonies and is the Universal Law of all Nations and Countries 2. It were impertinent to prove Ceremonies before a Parliament because the same being a Court of Equity ought to judge according to Trust and Intention of Marriage though the Witness of Ceremonies are Dead and Writings lost or burnt whereby any verbal Promise or Ceremonial form of Words cannot be proved 3. God forbid the Representative of the People in Parliament whom they have intrusted with all they have in Matters of such infinite weight should be so Ludicrous as to cast away the safety of the King's Person to Extinguish his Lineal Blood to Destroy the Religion Liberty Propriety and Lives of all his Protestant Subjects in the Three Kingdoms on such Toys as that there are no Witnesses to be got to prove Ceremonies of Verba de Praesenti or With my Body I thee worship or to Swear that the Ring was Gold and not Brass or that it was put on the fourth Finger and not on the fifth or not on the Tumb but on the Finger 4. It is impertinent to prove Ceremonies in a Court of Equity especially in the Supreme Court of Equity which a Parliament is who ought to judge Right Secundum aequum Bonum without any regard to Ceremonies as to make Estates good without Livery of Seisin Attornment Inrolement Fine Common Recovery or the like so likewise ought they to judge without any regard of the Ceremonies and Formalities of Pleadings according to the Truth and Merits of the Cause yea they ought not only to judge without but contrary to all Ceremonies and Formalities if they find them Estopples to Truth and Bars to Equity yea contrary to the Law it self if they find it Summum Jus. 5. In this very point of Legitimation the High Court of Parliament ought to judge according to Truth and Equity though contrary to all Ecclesiastical Laws and contrary to all Episcopal Certificates as appears by Coke expresly Part 4. fol. 36. where he saith The Parliament may Bastard a Child that is by Law Legitimate viz. Begotten by an Adulterer the Husband being within the four Sees as Rot. Parl. 5. Et 6 E. 6. in the Marquess of Winchester's Case and may Legitimate one that is by Law Illegitimate and born before Marriage that is without the Ceremonies of Marriage And this may be done Absolutely or with Exception of which later way take one Example for many John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster had by Katharine Swinford who was not Married with the Ceremony of a Priest and a Temple four Children Slander'd in those Popish Times with the Name of Illegitimate viz. Henry John Thomas and Joan and because they were Born at Beaufort in France they were vulgarly called Henry de Beaufort c. After at a Parliament holden 20 R. 2. The King by Act of Parliament in the form of a Charter doth Legitimate these three Sons and Joan the Daughter with an Exception which is Excepta dignitate Regali which shews that the King and Parliament may when they please Legitimate according to the Moral Law of God and not only without but contrary to Ceremonies And though they shall not yet is the Legitimation by the Law of God above that of all Humane Laws And though a Right thereby Dormit aliquando yet Moritur nunquam as appears in Henry the Seventh who long after derived his Title from John de Beaufort Duke of Somerset the second Son of John of Gaunt by Katharine Swinford who was only Married according to the Moral Law of God and without the Ceremonies of a Priest and a Temple notwithstanding the Exception in the Act R. 2. Excepta dignitate Regali for what that Act denied him a later Act gave him and before he Married with the Lady Elizabeth the Daughter of Edward the Fourth and Heir of the House of York the Crown was by Act of Parliament intailed to Henry the Seventh and the Heirs of his Body and indeed all Settlements of the Crown by Act of Parliament both in the House of York and Lancaster are in themselves Legitimations without any naming the word where there hath been any Scruples concerning the same and though there have been none are the surest and most undisputable Titles of Successors and of the greatest Advantage to the Possessors which is visible in the Examples of the Kings of England and Scotland the greatest part of whom have made use of Acts of Parliament though their Titles have been unquestionable Upon the whole it seems not possible for any Title of Succession to be more clear both in Divinity Law and Equity than the present except by Act of Parliament wherein the Person is particularly named which is only wanting to make known to others what the same is already in it self And to declare by a particular Act what is already declared by this General Act of E. 3. And all other the General Laws of God and the Land before mention'd WILL. LAWRENCE THE CONTENTS OF The Third BOOK CAP. I. THe words of the Statute 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus as in the Original French Page 1. The Statute of Kenneth 3. and Malcolm Mackenneth 2. concerning the Succession to the Crown of Scotland as related by Buchanan Page 2. Objections against these Statutes made chiefly by Buchanan himself and the Policy of them in
under Imprudent to seek to perpetuate Races against Nature Fate and Providence which are irresistible few above So in the Ancient Kingdom of the Egyptians there were above Twenty Dynastyes at the Period of every one of which the Race of that King who began to Rule the Dynastye Either Expired or was Extinguished or Destroyed and it is easie to see how many Races and Names of several Kings have in short time worn out and been changed to new both in England Scotland France Spain c. It is in vain therefore by human Laws to seek to resist the Decrees of God and perpetuate a Race which God hath appointed to Determine Seeing as Solomon saith Eccles 9.11 The Race is not to the swift nor the Battel to the strong neither yet Bread to the wise nor yet Riches to men of understanding nor yet Favour to men of skill And it is said Dan. 4. The Most High Ruleth in the Kingdom of men and giveth it to whomsoever he will Better therefore both to Princes and Subjects is the Counsel of Christ Matth. 6.33 Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and his Righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you Dan. 7.27 Whose Kingdom is an Everlasting Kingdom And as is said Psal 16.11 In his Presence is fulness of Joy at his Right Hand are Pleasures for evermore Answ 1 Answ 1. As to the first Objection That the Brother ought to be preferred before the Son and Liberty left according to ancient Custom to the Parliament to Elect him if he is Judged fittest for Succession And that the Brother is alwaies most fit and more for the Safety of the Kingdom he being alwaies of greater Age and Experience than the Son who may chance to be a Child and more need Tutors and Governours himself than to Govern others As to which part of the Reason of possibility of Minority in the Son I answer First That à Posse ad esse non valet Argumentum And with all due Honour had to the Age and Experience of others the Eldest Son is here no Infant or Minor But hath attained to a higher Maturity and Flower of Age and Strength than Alexander the Great who began at Twenty to Conquer the World and hath shewn already the Highest Proof of Valour in War and Affection to Religion and Justice in Peace Secondly admit it should happen the Eldest Son to be an Infant or Minor as the intention of this Statute is it may which make it notwithstanding his Infancy Treason to Practise against him And though an Eldest Son should be left at the Death of any King an Infant or Minor yet by the Mercy of God the Righteousness of the Title and a standing Parliament During the Minority The Infant and Kingdoms are as Safe as if he were of full Age And more Safe than in the hand of a Collateral Heir of full Age whose Guardianship is most dangerous to a Lineal Heir Answ 2 Answ 2. As to the Reason That it is more for the Fame of Vertue for the Father to have none of his name Than to have his name Lost amongst a Multitude of the same names derived from him to numerous Posterity I shall answer in the words of Buchanan in another place on another dispute p. 406. Quod si de honore unus Et non de omnium salute hic esset disputatio Ego quoque facile ac Lubens ad eorum sententiam accederem verum cum de eo Statuendum sit hodie quod omnium privatorum vitam Et fortunam quod totius Regni incolumitatem complectitur huic uni câ—gitationi omnes Singulorum rationes concedere oportet Answ 3 Answ 3. As to that Reason of the Objection That Periods of Royal Races and Successions to Kingdoms are natural in regard the subject matter is so frail as not to be Capable of Perpetuity and fatal in regard God hath appointed the same by an Immutable Decree and Providential in regard it is often likewise effected by a particular Providence and seeing the Laws by which God Governs the World God governs the World by the Lawes of Nature Fate and Providence are the Law of Nature the Law of Fate and the Law of Providence quae supra nos nihil ad nos they are irresistible and all Human Laws to cause or avoid their effects are in vain To which is answer'd and gladly acknowledg'd That God is pleased to Govern the World by all these Three Lawes First the Law of Nature which is his Decree of Subordination of Causes Secondly the Law of Fate which is his Decree of Co-ordination of Causes to such Ends as to his Wisedom seem best These two are the Greatest Imperial and Immutable Law of the World and against these it is not only folly and a Sin to make Common Laws or Acts of Parliament Not lawful to pray against the Law of Nature or Fate but even to pray Desine fata Deum flecti sperare precando Hope not from Prayers thou Thy Fate from God canst bow Thirdly The Law of Providence which is the Regulation of Accidents which are neither Decreed nor Immutable And this is the Law Paternal Prayers not only Lawful but necessary in matters reserved to Providence by which he Governs all his Creatures sensible of Good and Evil. And as to this Law of Providence human Laws Endeavours and Prayers are not only Lawful in such as are Capable to Pray but necessary to obtain the good and to avert the evil and both these are acknowledged by the Heathen Poets themselves Sed satis est orasse Jovem qui donat et aufert Det vitam Det opes aequum mî animum ipse parabo Hor. lib. 1. ad Lollium Epist Flectitur Iratus voce Rogante Deus Ovid. But if we will take our Limitations of Prayer from Christians they must have alwaies these two That they must be Lawful that is not contrary to any revealed Law or Will of God and likewise be alwaies with submission to his Secret Will The Law Moral a Fourth Law by which God governs the World I Answer therefore That though the Three Laws mentioned are great and wonderful Wages by which God governs the World in general and Successions to Kingdoms in particular yet they are not the only Lawes by which he doth it but there is a Fourth Law as great as any of the former which is the Law Moral the obligation of which is Reward and Punishment which not Improperly may be called a Law Magistratical for as God is the Supreme King and Father so is he likewise Supreme Magistrate of the World and beareth not the Sword in vain And this Law may only be Exercised and the Obligations thereof laid on the most Noble Subjects who are so in Three respects First In regard of their Knowledg as the Law Moral can only be Exercised over the Subjects Sensible and Intellectual What Subjects liable to the Law Moral and
what not and what lyable to the Lawes of Nature Fate and Providence whereas the Laws of Fate and Nature may be Exercised both over these and over Subjects Ignorant Insensible Irrational Foolish Mad-men and deprived of all Intellect alike Secondly in regard of their ability as the Law Moral can be only Exercised on persons able to perform it but the Laws of Nature Fate and Providence over Babes new born Blind Deaf Dumb Maimed and the Dead themselves Thirdly in regard of Liberty as the Law Moral can only be Exercised over free Agents but the Lawes of Nature Fate and Providence may be Exercised over necessary Agents forced Agents Bond-men Slaves Captives Prisoners and persons in Chains and Fetters Though therefore all humane Actions are under one of these four Laws a Man is a necessary Agent as to the Law of Nature and a forced Agent to the Law of Fate and Providence and a free Agent as to the Moral Law yet seeing he may be in many things Ignorant when he is Ruled by Nature when by Fate when by Providence Not revealed to Man by which of these four Laws he doth Act in any particular Action and when by the Moral Law and consequently it may be secret and not revealed unto him when he is a necessary agent when a forced agent and when a free agent or in the more Common word when his Will is free and when Bond In this Ignorance therefore of all the other Three Secret Laws he ought to act according to the Moral Law which God hath revealed and promulgated alwaies and according to the other Three when God hath in particular Acts of his own manifested his Will in them as it is an Act of God that an Eldest Son is born who is an Infant or Minor And a Brother born who is a Major and this Act of God is good and of great Mercy but that on this Act of God Murder should be Committed or Civil Wars be unjustly Raised is Evil and an Act of Man and God is not the Author of this Sin and though no humane Law could have caused or prevented this of the Infancy of a Son or Majority of a Brother yet may and ought human Laws prevent or punish the wicked acts of men which may ensue thereon in attempts to Murder either and seeing God by his Moral Law hath Commanded Powers to be a Terror to Evil Doers it is their Duty therefore And if they neglect it the bear the Sword in vain to make Laws to prevent and punish them and not to leave Infants and Subjects Exposed in such a Wilderness of Dangers as this is of Succession because its possible Fate may destroy them notwithstanding the greatest human care and Providence may without any such care taken at all preserve them Which Stoical and Epicuraean Follies of fata regunt homines fatis agimur Cedite fatis or Res humanas ordine nullo fortuna regit or vita regitur Fortuna non Sapientia to Extend beyond their Bounds prescribed by God or to all humane Actions because ordained and permitted in some were like the Ridiculous Pagan Divinity derived from none but such Authors Not to sow because Fate may destroy the Harvest with it and Providence may give an Harvest without it Not to wear Arms in War because Fate may destroy with them and Providence may preserve without them Not to do good Works because if Predestinated to be Damn'd thou shalt be Damn'd with them And if Predestinated to be Saved thou shalt be saved without them I should not have thought this of Fate worth the objecting or answering had I not found the same Actually press'd in the most Excellent Historian and Statist that ever writ in the Isle of Great Britain for such was Buchanan out of whom I have recited it Answ 4 To the Objection of the Civil Wars between Baliol and Bruce and York and Lancaster notwithstanding the Succession of the Crown ascertained to the Kings Eldest Son Answ 4. As to the Calamities of Civil Wars which followed between Baliol and Bruce in Scotland and the Houses of York and Lancaster in England notwithstanding the Laws in both Kingdoms making the Crown Hereditary to the Eldest Son And that such Lawes did not prevent the same I Answer first As to Scotland the effect of the Law of Primogeniture could not be expected where there was no Eldest Son surviving nor on the Death of Margaret of Norway so much as an Heir Lineal Male or Female left but if there had been an Eldest Son left there is no appearance of any thing against it but the Crown of Scotland had never Returned to the Line of the Earl of Huntingdon but remained in the Line of King Alexander the Third who was the last Possessor which would have prevented all those Ten Competitors to claym from Huntingdon and consequently the Wars between Baliol and Bruce Then as to the Civil Wars in England if Richard the Second had left a Son there appears no probability that ever there had been a Civil War between York and Lancaster Besides if when there is an Eldest Son left as was by Edward the Fourth and an younger Son with him and notwithstanding there followed a new Civil War between York and Lancaster in the Persons of Richard the Third and Henry the Seventh first though this Law of Primogeniture in Succession did not prevent it And though the Law make it High Treason to Compass the death of the Eldest Son yet could it not prevent the Murder of both the Sons To which I answer That it is not to be Imputed as a fault to the Statute or Law that some wicked persons dare break it but is notwithstanding of greater use as the Statutes which make it High Treason to Counterfeit the Kings Seal or to Clip Money and Felony to Rob on the High-Way Though many have notwithstanding Counterfeited the Seal Clipt Money and Rob'd on the High-way yet are not these Statutes Useless but a great Security to the People for though there are now a few if there were no such Statute at all there would be multitudes of Malefactors Richard the Third designing to Murder his Brother's Sons first slandered them with Illegitimacy Besides as to the Particular Instance of Edward the Fourth it was his Inadvertency and indeed Imprudence to Commit the Guardianship of his Son in Minority to his Brother who thereupon forged Illegitimacy against them and Murdered them And it was done for want of such a Law of Succession as was Enacted by Kenneth the Third and Malcolme Mackenneth the Second in Scotland which according to Buchanan lib. 6. p. 191. was A Guardian by the Law of Scotland to be Elected by Parliament during the Minority of the Prince Vt Rege Impubere Tutor qui pro Rege esset interea Eligeretur vir prudentia opibus insignis qui ad quartodecimum usque Annum Regis nomine rem administraret Ad id aetatis
ubi Rex pervenerit ipsi sibi curatores Eligere posset That the King being under the Age of Fourteen Years Election should be made of a Guardian of great Estate and Wisdom who should be his Regent in the mean while and Administer his Affairs in the King's Name till he arrived at the Age of Fourteen and when he came to that Age he himself might choose his own Guardians Which Election of a Guardian must be intended to be by Parliament for it appears by the words That the Infant or Minor King must not nor is able to choose himself till he come to the Age of Fourteen And it is contrary to Reason that any other should be his own Judge to choose himself to have to himself to his own use the Custody of the Person of the King Dangerous to Commit the Guardianship of a Minor prince to the next Major in whom all his Subjects have an Interest And it would be very Dangerous to the Infant if he who is next Successor to the Crown should get the Custody of the Heir into his hands There is no Third Power can be therefore above Exception who ought to choose the Guardian of an Infant King but the Parliament And accordingly we find it to be the constant Practice of that Kingdom as appears Buchanan Lib. 19. p. 687. when it is said Sed cum homines usu rerum Edocti Perspicerint vix fieri posse ut in tanta fortunae inconstantia non aliquando in pueros aut alioqui Regno ineundo Impares haeredes jus summi Magistratus inciderit c. But when taught by Experience men saw that it could not be but in so great inconstancy of Fortune but the Right of the Supreme Magistracy might fall amongst Children or other Heirs unfit to Govern a Kingdom they Ordained That in the mean time one should be Elected Regent who Excell'd the rest in Estate and Counsel Guardians chosen by Parliament the only Security of Kings in Minority and our Ancestors following this way for the space of Six hundred Years have transmitted thereby the Kingdom safe to Posterity So Robert Bruce being dead Thomas Randolph Earl of Murray and Donald Earl of Mar Andrew Murray John Randolph Robert Stuart succeeded singly and sometimes more number are by Parliament chosen into that place So James II. being a child Alexander Leviston being of no Kin nor of the chief Rank of Nobility but only a Knight and of more repute for Prudence then Antient Descent was elected to be his Guardian Neither can there be alledged any want of persons of the Royal Stock to have been the cause of such choice for there was at that time John Kennedy chief of his Family and King James his Nephew by his Sister there were his Uncles James Kennedy Archbishop of St. Andrews Primate of the whole Kingdom in all kind of Vertue and his Brother born of the Kings Aunt Douglass Earl of Angus was not remote from the Kings Blood Archibald Earl of Douglas in Power almost equal to the King and superiour to any of the rest yet did none of these complain of any Injustice in the Parliament for making another choice and not long after four Guardians were given to James III. not taken for the Kindred but chosen by Parliament It was but of late that John Duke of Albin was sent for by the Nobility out of France to moderate the Affairs of Scotland James I. being then a child and was confirmed by a publick Act of Parliament Neither was it done because he was next of Kin for he had an Elder Brother called Alexander But James I. being absent Robert his Uncle ruled the Kingdom And with what Right Was he taken for nearness of Blood No he was chosen by the People Nor so neither How then was he created When Robert III. was so sick in body and mind that he was not able to discharge his Office he made his Brother Robert his Vice-Roy and commended his Children to him So his Brother starved to death David his Eldest Son and sought how to destroy likewise James his Younger had he not escaped by slight But he being now placed in possession of his Tyranny and his Brother dead with grief without Parliament or assent of the People he kept it and by force left it to his Son Mordach c. Buchanan proceeds p. 688. Quid enim minus justum esse poterat quam aetatem innoxiam atque infirmam ejus fidei committere qui pupilli sibi crediti mortem semper expectat optat What can be more injust then to commit the innocent and weak Age to one who always hopes for or wishes the death of the Pupil intrusted in his hands And after he saith Laodice the Queen of the Cappadoceans is related to have killed every one of her children as in order they arrived at fourteen years of age to gain thereby a little more time to reign If a Mother will destroy her Children to get the use of a little time what shall we think will their old Enemies dare yea will they not dare to do inflamed with the Brands of Covetousness to cruelty against a Child hindering their hopes of a perpetual Kingdom If this Example seems old and obscure or far-fetch'd I will add more clear and nearer home For who is so ignorant of things so lately acted as he knows not Galeacius Sfortia though at mans Estate though married and the Son in Law of a Potent King to be killed by Lodowick his Uncle Or to whom are the Calamities unknown which ensued that cruel Parricide the most beautiful Region of Italy brought almost to a Devastation the Sfortian Family The not abolishing Episcopal Laws which pretend to Illegitimate whom they please the sense of the Murder of Edward V. and his Brother so fruitful of valiant men destroyed Barbarians let into the most pleasant Country watered by Po. Against whose Rapine nothing was safe against whose Cruelty nothing was secure Who hath been born in the soil of Great Britain and hath not heard of the cruel Murder by Richard III. King of England of the Sons of his Brother Edward IV A great cause of the murder likewise of these Princes was that Papal and Episcopal Laws were not abolished which pretend to illegitimate whom they please Answ 5 Making a Kingdom hereditary to the eldest Son weakens not the Power of Parliaments And 5. as to the Reason against these Statutes which maketh the Crown hereditary to the eldest Son that the same enervate the strength of Parliaments and without a Contract made by every Prince with a Parliament no Government can be just in regard if he receives not the Kingdom by Contract he assumes it by Conquest which over a Free Nation is unjust To which is answered First that these Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which entail the Crown to the Eldest Son do no way weaken but confirm and establish the Power of Parliaments and
required by the Statute Answ To which is Answered That if she had been the Wife of another man or any other had had a Lawful Propriety in her it is not denied but the Objection might have been material but here was the most Lawful way of Election of a Companion and acquiring Propriety in her not only according to Gods Ordinance but the Lawes of all Nations except the Papal and Episcopal and not Impertinently as expressed by the Poet Elige de vacuis quam non sibi vindicat alter Si nescis Dominum res habet ista suum Take her that 's free if it thou knowest not Think she some unknown Master then hath got Here was Possessio vacua Virgo intacta neither Party Prohibited by any Law of God to take or yield Possession or acquire Propriety one in another All Lawyers which write de modis acquirendi Dominij in a Wife and Children though they lay it as a Fundamental That Contract Sponsions Promises yea Buying and Selling it self only create an obligation but Transfer no Propriety without Tradition of Possession according to the Old Verses Rem Domino vel non Domino vendente duòbus In jute est potior traditione prior And though acquisition of the possession of Women and Children by Tradition or Seizure or other wayes without carnal knowledge and Generation doth only acquire the Propriety of them as of Slaves or Servants but not as of Wives or Children yet they assirm and the whole Scripture assirms with them that carnal knowledge between persons not prohibited by the Law of God is an acquisition of Propriety in the Woman and generation an acquisition of Propriety in children And that all Ceremonies of acquiring Propriety in Wives without carnal knowledge and all Adoptions for acquiring Propriety in children without genoration of them are Fictions and Fopperies The Scripture therefore calls every woman Lawfully laien with by a Man his Wife and every Son he begets his Son which gives a Propriety of all which Texts of Scripture I shall speak more largely in answer to the next Objection Object 4 Not Married according to the Law of God Object 4. That she was not Married according to the Law of God Answ 1 Before the contrary is proved to this Negative and the Truth shewen unanswerably that she was married according to the Law of God It will be necessary to prove by what Law the Law of God concerning marriage ought not and ought to be Judged whether it be the Law of God or no. Secondly By what Judge Marriage ought not and ought to be Judged to be not according or according to the Law of God As to the Law by which it ought not it is clearly and fully already prov'd therefore to avoid repetition I refer the Reader to the former Books Chapters Pages here following quoted viz. That it ought not to be Judged 1. By the Law of Moses and Customes of the Jewes of which Vid. Lib. 1. p. 2. 2. By the Laws and Customes of the Heathen Nations Vide. Lib. 1. p. 10. 3. By the Laws Civil Canon or Feudal Vid. Lib. 1. p. 21. 4. By the Laws of Mahomet Vid. Lib. 1. p. 26. 5. By Ecclesiastical Laws Vid. Lib. 1. p. 31. 6. By such Laws of England Scotland or Ireland as are Reliques of Popery or contrary to the Laws of God Vid. Lib. 1. p. 64. usque ad p. 125. 7. By Ceremonial Laws Vid. Lib. 1. p. 127. Of the Absurd and Ridiculous Ceremonies on which Priests would have Marriage Filiation Aliment and Succession to depend Vid. Lib. 1. p. 127. Of the Original of Compulsion to the Ceremonies of a Priest and Temple in Marriage which came from the Priests of Priapus and Venus Pagan Gods and Goddesses Magicians Aruspices Astrologers Daemons with the Strumpets Theodora Marozia and others and Popes and Bishops their Chaplains Vid. Lib. 1. p. 43.45.52.83 of Theodora and Morozia more p. 79. Of the sinal causes of Compulsion to the said Ceremony of a Priest and a Temple viz. the Insatiable Lust Covetousness and Ambition of Priests Vid. Lib. 1. p. 53. Of the most Dismal Effects and Mischiefs insuing Compulsion of the Ceremony of a Priest and Temple in Marriage Vid. Lib. 2. p. 192. usque ad 250. et ultra Of certain other Mischiefs not before Recited Of the damnable Effects ensuing Prohibitions to Marry and nulling Marriage except by a Priest in a Temple contrary to the Moral Law of God Other mischiefs not before recited of Compulsion of the Ceremony of a Priest and Temple in Marriage and the false naming that Marriage which is no Marriage and false nameing that no Marriage which is a Marriage whereby they call Good Evil and Evil Good Light Darkness and Darkness Light so that the whole Mystery of the Romish Antichrist depends on the Compulsion of this Ceremony to Marry Bury and Pray by a Priest in a Temple The wicked Causes of Prohibiting the Clergy to Marry by this Ceremony of a Priest and Temple and compelling the Laity 1 Without this Ceremony they could not prohibit marriage to their Clergy which Militia Togata of theirs to keep unmarried is one of the Arcana Imperij Papalis and was first Decreed by Pope Nicholas the First The sinal causes were 1. That the Priests might have no Dependance or be under command of the Lay-Lords by reason of their Wives and Families for whom if they kept them they would be necessitated to provide Lay-Maintenance the Spiritual being too short Commons for so many 2. That what Wives and Children the Priests had they might sit by other mens Fires and be maintained at other mens Tables and succeed to other mens Inheritances 3. That the Priests might be the Richer and Abler to pay the more Tributes and Taxes to the Pope 4. That they might be provoked to Lye with the more Lay-mens Wives and thereby fish out all the Secrets of their Husbands for Intelligence to Lay their own Plots and discover those against them in Auricular Confession 5. That they might not be put to the usual Cost of Intelligence which is commonly very Dear but might by this way be had for nothing and probably with Rewards to such Gallants 6. That between the Woman and the Priest they might Rob the Lay-man of his Goods and share it between them 7. That when the Lay-man was come to die the Woman to whom her Living man was more pleasant than her Dying might persuade him to make the Priest Overseer of his Goods and of the Children he had got for him And to give Land to Pious that is to say Pontifical Uses 8. That the Lay-men might not Lye with the Priests Wives and return to them the Talio to which end they made themselves Judges of the Causes of Divorce And made strict Canons Prohibiting the Lay Divorce à Vinculo for Adult'ry and that they should give Surety and Bond though Divorced à Mensâ Thoro while either was Living never to
Right repeal it For Liberty and Propriety cannot consist with the Certificates of Bishops Marriage and Filiation not to be submitted to any Judges or Arbitrators except the Parties themselves or God 8. Certificates of Marriage and Filiation usurp the Power of Judgment of such Matters as cannot be submitted though the Parties assented to any Arbitrators or Judges but God himself or the Parties And this is very Judiciously delivered by West Symbol Tit. Compromise Arbitrement fo 165.6 That no causes Matrimonial are arbitrable lest men should separate those whom God hath joyn'd together If this is true as none but stupidity it self can be but sensible that the Laws of God cannot be submitted to the Arbitrement of Men what then becomes of all Episcopal Certificates of Marriage and Filiation unless they intend to fight against God himself Bishop who certifies ignorant both of Fact and Law 9. The Judge who makes the Certificate is totally Ignorant both of the Fact and Law which see already proved Lib. 2. p. 180. Herodotus tells of a Place in Lybia where the Children of Women who were common drew Lots before a Publick Assembly but whether the Assembly were Ecclesiastical it doth not appear of such whom their Mothers nominated and whom the Lot fell on what wise Children were these They knew them to be their own Fathers as infallibly no question as if they had try'd by the Witchcraft of a Seive and a pair of Shears and equally with a Bishop's Certificate only on the first they paid no Fees The blind Goddess being always found so just she will take none 10. The Case is false â—â—ated as the state of the Question which is made is Whether A fuit Legitimo Matrimonio copulata when the intent is by the Bishops Certificate to Null the Marriage whereas this Question as to Nulling the Marriage is impertinent for every Prohibited Marriage is not Null or Nullable but may be notwithstanding 't is Prohibitum be Indissolubile 11. 'T is stated Illegitimum Matrimonium in General Illegitimum Prohibitum illegitimum in se and doth not say whether Illegitimum Prohibitum or Illagitimum in se each of which will fall under clean different Considerations one from another And that to teach that any Illegitimum Prohibitum in Marriage is unlawful which is not Illegitimum in se is the Doctrine of Devils as is already proved Lib. 1. p. 52. The state of the Question ought to be whether Son or no Son which is Matter of Fact and not whether Legitimate or not Legitimate which is Matter in Law 12. The true state as to Filiation being to be the question Whether Son or no Son 't is false stated and false named Whether Bastard or whether Legitimate or not Legitimate where it hath been proved at large Lib. 1.79 That there 's no such word or thing as Legitimate or Illegitimate amongst the ancient Lawyers or in Rerum naturâ till Popery And Lib. 2. p. 146. and 156. That there was no such word or thing as Bastard in the whole Scripture or amongst the ancient Lawyers or Divines until the Popes and Bishops falsly Translated the Scriptures As to the word Mamzer which signifies no more than Alienigena and Nothus which signifies no more than Fictus into the forementioned Scurrilous word of their own unclean Invention Certificate of the Bishop Nonsense Certificate of the Bishop Nulls all Marriage Prohibited contrary to the Law of England and Scotland 13. Their Certificate as to Marriage Per verba de Praesenti is Nonsence which see already proved Lib. 1. p. 84. 14. The Certificate distinguisheth not between Marriage Prohibited and Null but Nulls every Marriage Prohibited and barbarously Illegitimates every Child born of the same which is already proved Lib. 1. p. 110. to be contrary to the Law of God and the Law of England and may likewise appear to be contrary to the Law of Scotland by an Act of Parliament there made Sess 2. Par. 2. Car. 1. Act. 22. against Clandestine Marriage which Act Prohibits and punisheth those who are Married without Banns or by Josuits or Popish Priests and layes Fines or every Nobleman so offending of Five Thousand Pounds and on every Gentleman or Burgess of one Thousand Marks but neither English nor Scotch make such Prohibited Marriages void nor Nulls them nor Illegitimates their Children neither can any Humane Law Null that Marriage which the Moral Law of God makes valid nor separate those whom the same Law Prohibits not to Marry though the Law of Man doth when God hath joyned them by Procreation and Birth of a Child Propriety in Parents and Children destroyed by Bishops Certificates 15. The Episcopal Certificate destroys all Propriety the Father hath in his Children and the Children have in their Father For by the Law of God and Nature there 's no way of acquiring Propriety in Children but by begetting of them This is Plain in the Scripture in all the Genealogies there mentioned And in the Fact of Adultery of David with Vriah's Wife where the Child who was begotten in Adultery is plainly made by the Scripture the Child of David though the Now Episcopal Certificate would make it the Child of Vriah And worthily may such be said to be ignorant of all Laws of acquiring Propriety in Children who pretend because the Propriety of another man's Lambs and Kids may by Contract of his own Wife be made his therefore the Propriety of another man's Children may likewise by her Contract be made his and because Quicquid plantatur seritur vel inaedificatur omne solo cedit And Judge Rikhill as before-mentioned will not only have the like accession of another man's Bull to his Cow to make the Calf to be his but likewise to be his Cow and himself to be not only the Owner but the Father of such Calf The Ignorance of all Law in Certificates therefore blindly subverts the Fundamental of all Acquisition of Propriety by the Father in begetting No wonder if they destroy the Propriety of the Children in the Father though begotten by him and make them Nullius filii and again forces a Child on him who is not the Father to be his Heir whether he will or no and robs him of his Inheritance Neque enim aequum non consentienti haeredem alium dare Craig 267. Certificates of Bishops deprive Infants of Aliment and destroy them 16. The Certificate of the Bishop exposeth Infants to be destroyed and deprives them of all Aliment from the Father who begot them For by making the Father who begot them to have no Propriety in them nor they in him and the Children to be Nullius filii all Obligation is taken off from the Father and he 's made worse than an Infidel not to provide for his own Children either by Aliment while alive or Succession after his death The true Children are disinherited by the Adulterous on Certificates 17. The Certificate starves and
both in England and Scotland sought to dishonour him with the Name of Nothus for by that name Buchanun Rerum Scot. 175. Stiles him and says Praerat omnibus Anglorum copiis Athelstanus Edwardi Nothus And in the same manner other Writers yet was neither the name nor the thing any bar of his Succession to the Kingdom but he was thereto prefer'd before his younger Brother Edmund whom Papal Laws made Legitimate and accordingly he was Crowned by Athelmus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury at Kingston upon Thames And proved after the most Heroick Victorious Prince that the English ever had before the Conquest for he conquered both the Danes and Scots confederated against him and Subdued the whole Island Edward the Son of Edgar Legitimate per Jus Coronae Ethestede for her excellent Beauty sirnamed the White was a Virgin and not Prohibited by Law of God for King Edgar to Marry but he neglected or despised Pontifical Ceremonies and begot on her without them his eldest Son Edward for which Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury injoyned him seven years Pennance which he underwent for the Fact After Edgar Married Elfrida the only Daughter and Heiress of Ordganus Duke of Devonshire with the Ceremonies of the Church and made her his Queen and likewise Contracted with her That her Children should be Heirs to the Crown and had Issue by her two Sons Edmund who died young and Ethelred who survived him Edgar dies Note here are all the Objections made against the succeeding to the Crown by Edward which are now made and more for here is an Heir by Marriage-Covenant opposed against the Natural Heir Queen Elfrid excepted against the Succession of Edward the eldest Son That his Mother was no Queen nor Wife Married according to the Ceremonies of the Church and that he was therefore Illegitimate That she her self was King Edgar's Queen and Wife whom he Married Solemnly according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church and that by his Marriage-Covenants he bound himself That her Children by him should be Successors to the Kingdom That therefore her Son was both the Legitimate Heir and Heir by Covenant and thereupon drew divers Lords to be of her Party and the two Sons are both produced before the Council assembled to demand their Rights But while the Council sate to Debate the same Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury came in with his Banner and Cross and not staying for dispute of the Title presented Prince Edward the eldest Son as next right Heir to the Crown and their lawful King and the Assembly consisting most of Clergy-Men drew the Approbation of the Rest whereupon Prince Edward was Admitted and Crowned King being but Twelve years old by Archbishop Dunstan at Kingston upon Thames Anno Dom. 975. and so continued till about Three years and Six Months after King Edward Hunting in the Isle of Purbeck not far from Corf Castle where his Mother-in-Law Queen Elfrid with his Brother Ethelred were then Residing he out of his Love to both would needs go to visit them where the cruel Step-mother out of Ambition to make her own Son King caused one to Stab him in the Back with a Knife as he was Drinking a cup of Wine on Horseback at his departing who feeling himself hurt set Spurs to his Horse thinking thereby to get to his Company but the wound being Mortal and he fainting through loss of so much Blood fell from his Horse and one foot being intangled in his Stirrup he was thereby ruefully dragged up and down and lastly left Dead at Corf Gate in Commiseration of which untimely Death he was ever afterward called Edward the Martyr On which may be noted 1. That notwithstanding the Mother of Edward was no Queen Notwithstanding she was never Contracted nor Married by the Rites and Ceremonies of the then Church Notwithstanding Elfrid was a Queen and solemnly Married by all those Rites and Ceremonies notwithstanding the Kingdom was by Marriage-Covenant setled on her Issue by King Edgar Notwithstanding Ethelred appeared with a Company of Lords Competitors Notwithstanding the accompanying of Edgar with Elfred was through Romish Superstition thought so unlawful as not to be Expiated under seven years Pennance Yet the same Archbishop Dunstan who imposed the same on the Father laid none on the Son but he and the Clergy declared him the Right and Lawful Heir by which they did implicitly confess and acknowledge That the Moral Law of God of Marriage and not any Ceremonial Law of Man is the immutable Law which ought to Govern the Succession of the Crown 2. The opinion of the Possession of the Crown to purge all Treason from him who commits it hath been a great incouragement to the committing of the same 3. That Princes disinheriting the Children of the first Wives and entailing their Kingdoms to the Children of the Second destroying thereby their own Houses 4. That none are more Cruel to the Children of the first Mothers than Step-mothers which it seems makes all Poets so out of Charity with them that they never mention them without some odious Epithet of Injustae mala dirae ferae terribiles Novercae and defame them with Stabbing Poisoning and Witchcraft Pocula si quando Saevae infecere Novercae Miscueruntque herbas non innoxia verba Virg. Georg. 2. When Cruel Step-mothers Poys'ning the Cup Add Herbs and Spells for Right Heirs to drink up I find but one kind of Step-mother excepted by Horace as not apt to be Guilty of these Practices which is she that neither brings Portion nor expects Jointure particularly of the Getick Women of whose Chastity and good Nature he thus writes Illic matre carentibus Privignis mulier temperat innocens Nec dotata regit virum Conjux nec infido fidit adultero Dos est magna parentium Virtus metuens alterius viri Certo foedere castitas Et peccare nefas aut pretium mori The innocent and kind Step-mothers there The Orphans Motherless to hurt forbear And not with Portions o're their Husbands rant Helpt by the Gay adulterous Gallant Vertue is Portion great and Chastity Strange man to touch more fearing than to Die 5. That where Marriage by the Ceremonial Laws of Men is preferr'd before a Marriage by the Moral Law of God this makes way for all Murders by Step-mothers of the Children of first Mothers of which see likewise the Example of Roxalana before related at large Lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 245. William the Conqueror succeeded to his Natural Fathers Dukedom his Mother never Married by a Priest in a Temple William the Conqueror was the Son of Rollo Duke of Normandy by Arlotte a mean Woman whom he made Sa Compaigne or Sociam Thalami without any Ceremonies of a Priest or Temple she was a Person how mean soever yet not Prohibited by the Law of God for him to Marry and though some slander her in hatred to her Son as if by some Lightness of hers all such as were of that Trade
fallen on the younger Sons of Jehosaphat by his leaving them overmuch Treasures and fenced Cities to the Diminution and Power of the eldest Son Jehoram 2 Chron. 21.1 2 3 4. Object 6. Queen Elizabeth Refused to Declare a Successor Osburne saith Q. Eliz. why she refused to declare a Suocessor The proposing any thing of Declaring a Successor was so ingrateful to Queen Elizabeth that the moving of the same cost Pigot and Wentmorth their Liberty though they proposed it in Parliament and others Dearer what were her Reasons against it may be partly drawn from Buchanan Lib. 17. p. 603. who saith on an Embassy sent from Scotland to her to desire she would Declare Mary Queen of Scots Successor to the Kingdom of England to which he saith Queen Elizabeth p. 606. answered to this Effect There are many Reasons saith she draw me away from this Transaction Primum quod non ignorem quam sit periculosum hanc movere camarimam ac jure mihi semper abstinuisse videor ne jus Regni in disceptationem vocarem Toties enim jam Sermonibus multorum Jactata est Controversia de Matrimonio justo deque nothis Legitimis Liberis dum pro ingenio quisque aut huic aut illi parti studet ut ego ipsa hactenus ob has Disputationes ad nubendum suerim Cunctatior c. First I am not Ignorant how dangerous it is to move this Contention and I seem to my self most Justly to abstain from Calling a Kingdom in Possession into Dispute concerning the Right for it is so often already Controverted what is Lawful Matrimony who are Legitimate and who are Illegitimate Children according to every man's Opinion and as he favours this or that Party That I my self by Reason of these Disputes have been hitherto more slow to Marry once when I Publickly received the Crown I was Married to my Kingdom and as a pledge of which I always wear this Ring And howsoever these Affairs stand I will as long as I live be Queen of England when I am dead let who hath the best Right be my Successor If your Queen is she I will no way be against her if another hath Right I will not do him wrong If there is a Law against your Queen it is unknown to me for I do not make willingly any curious Inquisition after this matter But if there is any such Law I took an Oath when I took the Kingdom that I will not Change my Subjects Laws without their assent But as to what you have alleadged in the second place That this Declaring a Successor will contract a straighter Friendship between us I rather fear it will sow hatred for do you think that I shall take any Delight to have my Funeral prepared always set before me It is a Peculiar of Kings that they have no friendly mind to Children who by Birth-right claim to be their Successors when they are dead Of what mind was Charles the Seventh the French King against Lewis the Eleventh and he against Charles the Eighth or Francis lately against Henry Of what mind therefore is it likely I shall be against my Neighbour when once Declared my Successor To this may be added what I think of very great weight I know the Peoples inconstancy I know how full they are of the present state of things I know what prying eyes they have into the next Successor The Dangerous Rising Sun is only a younger Brother or a Collateral Heir I know it is natural for more to adore the Rising than the Setting Sun And to omit other Examples I have seen enough in my own Time when my Sister Mary held the Kingdom what Prayers and they make to see me set in her Throne With what eagerness were my Concerns carried on neither am Ignorant to undergo what dangers they would have hazarded if I would have joyned with them according to their desire But now perhaps the same Men have not the same Mind towards me Like Children who in sleep rejoyce for Apples off'red them in a Dream and presently awaked in the Morning when deceived in their hopes Change their Joy into Weeping So they who with great Good will applied to me while I was called Elizabeth and if I beheld any with a more smiling Countenance they forthwith thought with themselves that as soon as I obtained the Kingdom they should be rewarded rather according to the measure of their Desires than of the good they had done me but now when the Event answers not their Expectation many of them would be ready to Change to any state of things so they might but gain a better fortune For no Riches of any Prince though never so great are sufficient to satisfie the insatiable desires of Men. Now if the affections of our People will Languish either for Moderate gifts or any other Light cause what will such Malevalents do if they have a certain Successor to whom to carry their grievances or go themselves when they are angry In what Danger do you think I shall be near so Potent a Prince my Successor to whom how much strength I add so much I take from my own Security This Danger by no Cautions or Bonds of Laws can be averted neither will Princes who fail of their hopes of a Kingdom easily contain themselves within the Bounds of Right and Equity And for my own Part if the world were certain of my Successor I shall never think my Affairs in Safety We see here the very Considerations we are now on of Declaring a Successor is in Debate by Embassador between these two great Queens Elizabeth of England and Mary of Scotland One the Head of the Protestants the other of the Papists in their two Kingdoms Queen Elizabeth was the Lineal Heir to the Kingdom of England to the last Possessor Queen Mary derived her self to be the Collateral Queen Elizabeth as it is before mentioned had been Declared Illegitimate by the Pope and Popish Laws and Canons and by her own Father And a Popish Act of Parliament she was not only Declared Illegitimate but the Marriage of the Lady Ann her Mother to her Father to be void with the Penalty of High Treason added on any who should affirm Contrary to the first or believe Contrary to the latter 1. Therefore it is to be observed That Queen Elizabeth being a Protestant thought it not wise or safe to Declare a Papist for her Successor yet she after Declared King James her Son who was a Protestant her Successor and it pleased God to make him an Happy Instrument to Unite both Kingdoms in the Protestant Religion 2. That she being the Lineal Heir thought it not wise or safe to Declare a Collateral Heir her Successor in her own Life-time Therefore thought she had a great Affection to make King James who was her Godson her Successor yet she forbare to Declare him so till on her Death-Bed she perceived her self past all hopes of having Lineal Heirs
Lucan Nobilitas cum plebe perit lateque vagatur Ensis à nullo revocatum est rectore ferrum Stat cruor in Templis multaque rubentia caede Lubrica saxa madent nulli sua profuit aetas Non senis extremum piguit vergentibus annis Praecipitasse diem nec primo in limine vitae Infantis miseri nascentia rumpere fata Crimine quo parui caedem potuere mereri Sed satis est jam posse mori And will any Protestants be Self-Murderers by committing themselves to the Oaths of such a Religion to return home from Foreign Popish perfidiousness and Perjuries to those in Great Britain Queen Mary of England most Cruel and perfidious to Protestants there hath been but one Papist Successor in England since the Reformation which was Queen Mary and she promised but perfidiously Liberty of Conscience to the Protestants and used their help to obtain the Crown which perhaps if they had not afforded her she might have missed but as soon as she became possessed of the Royal Power how faithlesly she broke her promise to them is well known and with what Cruelty incited by the Bishops prodigious in her Sex she delighted to see them Burning with her own Eyes and what a Tophet she made of the Land appears in the Acts and Monuments What eyes can behold the fiery Pictures there or read the bloody Characters of her Butcheries without tears And she had increased the number of them to so many as no Volume could have contained had not God in his Mercy sortned those days Queen Mary of Scotland and her Agents there most perfidious and cruel to Protestants It is known likewise Queen Mary of Scotland likewise broke Promise and Oath the Papist Faith and Oaths were no better kept to Protestants in Scotland than in England of which I shall only mention one Example of Mr. George Wischard persecuted to Death by the Bloody Cardinal Beton as is mentioned in Buchanan Lib. 15. rer Scot. 536. and in the History of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland p. 48 Mr. George Wischard a Protestant Minister first indeavoured to be assassinated by Cardinal Beton c. Mr. Wischard was a Diligent Preacher of the Gospel and most acceptable to the people for which reason Cardinal Beton prohibited him to Preach and he not desisting he corrupting with Money a desperate Priest named Sir John Weighton to kill the said Mr. Wischard and upon a Day the Sermon ended and the People departing no man suspecting Danger and therefore not heeding the said Mr. George the Priest that was corrupted stood waiting at the foot of the Steps his Gown loose and his Dagger drawn in his Hand under his Gown the said Mr. George marked him and as he came near he said My friend what would you do and therewith he clapped his hand on the Priests hand where the Dagger was and took it from him the Priest abashed fell down at his feet and being heard by other Company they cryed out Deliver the Traytor to us or we will take him by force and so they burst in at the Gate but Mr. George took him in his Arms and said Whosoever troubles him shall trouble me for he hath hurt me in nothing but hath done great Comfort to you and to me to wit he hath let us understand what we may fear in time to come we will watch better The Gentlemen of the West had written that Mr. George should meet them at Edinburgh for they would require Disputation of the Bishops and that he should be publickly heard whereto he willingly agreed He lays a Second Plot for the same The Cardinal dared not let it come to a publick Dispute therefore he Plots the second time to kill Mr. George as the surest way to defend their Murdering Religion and to that end he causeth a Letter to be Counterfeit in the Name of the Laird of Keimeir Mr. Wischard's familiar Friend which desires him with all possible diligence to come to him for he was strucken with a sudden Sickness and in the way layes an Ambush of Threescore Men with Jacks and Spears to dispatch him but this was likewise discovered the Cardinal vexed to be twice thus disappointed in his wicked design and got Intelligence that Mr. Wischard lodged at the House of John Cockburne Laird of Ormeston Seven miles from Edenburgh whereupon a Party of Horse was sent thither to demand Mr. George to be delivered them as a Prisoner to be carried before the Assembly of Prelates at Edenburgh the Laird made many Excuses and Spun out the time it being late hoping to pass Mr. Wischard out at a private Postern to escape when dark of which the Cardinal having notice by his Spies came together which the Governour thither at an unseasonable hour of Night and beset round all passages whereby none could escape Mr. Wischard betrayed by trusting to the perfidious Faith of Earl Bothwell yet neither by Promises Flatteries or Threats could he get Mr. George delivered into his hands till he called thither the Earl of Bothwell from his Country House which was near at hand to whom it was agreed he should be delivered on which the Earl gave his Solemn Faith and Promised on his Honour that he should be Safe and that it should pass the Power of the Cardinal to do him any harm and that neither the Governour or the Cardinal should have the Custody of him but he would retain him in his own hands and in his own House till either he should make him free or restore him to the same place whence he received him But being Corrupted by the Cardinals Gold and by the Queen he most perfidiously broke his Faith and Honour and delivered him a Prisoner into the hands of his Enemies the Prelates assembled at Edenburgh who having got their long sought for prey send him away to St. Andrews where the Cardinal had a Castle as he thought Impregnable where he was kept in hold in the Sea Tower of the same Castle which was done in the end of January Anno Dom. 1546. The Cardinal delayed no time but caused all the Bishops yea all the Clergymen who had any preheminence to be called to St. Andrews against the Seven and Twentieth day of February that Consultation might be had against this great Protestant who had so dangerously shaken the Foundations of Babel upon the last of February was sent to the Prison where Mr. George Wischard lay bound in Chains the Dean of the Town by Command of the Cardinal to Summon him to be before the Judge the morrow following to give account of his Seditious and Heretical Doctrine upon the next morrow the Lord Cardinal caused his Servants to address themselves in their most Warlike Array with Jack Knapscall Splent Spear and Axe and when these armed Champions marching in Warlike Order had conveyed the Bishops into the Abby Church incontinently they sent for Mr. George who was conveyed into the same by the
have been saved but the cruel Executioner threw it in again to be Burnt with the Mother Double deaths Here we see the Romish Bull with his two-horned Miter gores with double Deaths Mr. Wischard with Burning and Strangling Sir John Oldcastle Lord Cobham with Hanging in Chains and Burning Mrs. Anne Askew with Racking worse than Death and Burning And this poor Woman great with Child to be Burnt once her self and a second time in her Child The Cruel Massacres of Protestants of Merindoll How miserably have our Neighbours the French Protestants suffered from Cruelty of their Bishops Inciting the Temporal Sword against them in the Massacre of Merindoll Anno 1545. the Instrument being Minier the President of the Council of Aix for having Condemned this poor People of Heresie He Mustered a small Army and set Fire to their Villages They of Merindoll to avoid the Flame with their Wives and Children fled into Woods but were there Butchered or sent to the Galleys One Boy they took and placed him to a Tree and shot him to Death with Calivers 25 who had hid themselves in a Cave were some Stifled some Burned Of Chabriers In Chabriers they so Inhumanely dealt with the young Wives and Maids that most of them died-immediately after the Men and Women they put to the Sword 800 Men were Murdered in a Cave and 40 Women put together in an old Barn and Burned Heylin Geogr. 79. Anno 1655. Emanuel Duke of Savoy caused many Cruel Massacres and Out-rages to be Committed by his Souldiers on his Protestant Subjects in the Valleys of Piedmont Of Piedmont for which there were Days of Humiliation kept in England and Collections of Money made for their Relief Bak. Hist 644. And can the Horrid and Perfidious Massacres in the late Civil Wars in Ireland be so soon forgot wherein as estimated no less than Two hundred thousand English Protestants Of Ireland Men and Women and Children were destroyed who lived with the Irish not suspecting the Plots of the Popish Priests under the Trust and Faith of a Peace made with them which was most Treasonably by them broken Of the Parisian Massacre with the horrid Perjury of the French King The most Horrid and Hellish Parisian Massacre of an Hundred thousand of his Protestant Subjects Committed by that Popish and Perjured French King Charles the Ninth Anno Dom. 1572. is already mentioned and the Inhumane barbarousness of the same before Lib. 2. Ch. 1. p. 242 243 244. He Swore and Damned himself and Swore over and over again he would Inviolably keep the League and Peace he had made with his Protestant Subjects but when he had got them thereby to be secure and Trust themselves in his hands Let any see who will but take the pains to read the forementioned History of that Massacre how he used them for trusting of him Let any Papist Prince or Claimant to be a Papist Successor shew by which of his Gods he will Swear No Papist Successor can Swear deeper which Charles the Ninth did not Swear and Forswear himself by That he will give Liberty of Conscience to his Protestant Subjects And let such Protestant Subjects as are willing to have an Hundred thousand of them their Wives and Children Butcher'd with Inhumane and Barbarous Tortures while on trust of his Oath they put themselves into his Power give Faith to Perjury but let them Pardon their weaker Brethren if they are afraid to bear them Company Let Papist Priests transformed into Protestant Angels of Light Preach up blind Obedience and implicit Faith to Perjury But let them Excuse those sheep of their Flock who know the voice of the true Shepheard if they hear a true Protestant Pastor in another Fold Let the true Protestant Pastor hear likewise what is said Ezckiel 32.2 When I bring the Sword upon a Land if the People of the Land take a man of their Coast and set him for their watchman If when he seeth the Sword coming upon the Land he blow the Trumpet and warn the People Then whosoever heareth the sound of the Trumpet and takes not warning if the Sword come and take him away his blood shall be upon his own head He heard the sound of the Trumpet and took not warning his blood shall be upon him but he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul But if the watchman see the Sword come and blow not the Trumpet and the people be not warned if the Sword come and take away a person from among them he is taken away in iniquity but his blood will I require at the watchman's hands And do the true Protestant Pashor's Sheep Protestant Ministers to give the People warning against Papist Successors or their Blood will be required at their hands if it should happen the Sword of a Papist Successor should be coming on the Land to act over again in Great Britain all the Murders of Protestants by the two Maries all the Fires and Tortures on such Pious Martyrs as have been in Italy Spain France Germany England and Scotland All the Massacres of Merindol Chabriers Ireland Piedmont and Paris Do they think if they should not awake nor blow the Trumpets nor give the People warning of the Imminent Dangers appearing of the Discoveries of their Secret Plots shewn by God himself and of the Dangers and Destructions ensue thereby that the blood of so many Thousand Innocents shall not be required at the hand of the Watchmen Will this be to follow the Precept of Christ Matth. 10.16 Behold I send you forth as sheep in the middest of wolves be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves Is this to be wise as Serpents to suffer the old Romish Serpent to thrust in his head in a Papist Successor will he not quickly get in his Body will this be to follow the Precept of Christ Matth. 4.7 Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God To cast down all Protestants from the Pinacles of the Temple into the fiery furnaces of Popish Priests the incidents necessary of a Papist Successor and without warrant to expect God will shew Miracles to deliver them thence is not this most presumptuous wickedness and a tempting of God when God shews lawful means by Declaring a Protestant Successor by Act of Parliament to prevent any Papist Successor whatsoever with all the Train of Appurtenances of Popish Priests and fiery Furnaces at their Tails Let it be considered what these Popish Priests will probably most do as long as they have hopes to advance a Papist Successor to bring in them and all their Instruments of Superstition and Engines of Cruelty with them Have not their Plots and Practices already discovered what they have intended To Pistol Poison or Stab the Protestant King and his Protestant Eldest Son To make way for a Papist Successor A Papist Successor will seize on all the Protestant Treasure Arms Fleets Forts c. And what would a Papist
was written indeed by Parsons Doleman's bitter Adversary Cardinal Allen and Francis Englefield the Scope of which book was to exclude from Succession all Persons whatsoever and how near soever unless they were Roman Catholicks contending farther for the Right of the Infanta of Spain as being descended from Constance Daughter of William the Conqueror Foreign Papist Princes will declare a Successor for the Protestants if they shall not declare one for themselves Protestant Princes Marrying foreign Papists shall lose their own Kingdoms but not gain theirs from Eleanor Eldest Daughter to Henry the Second Married to Alphonse the Ninth King of Castile from Beatrix Daughter to King Henry the Third so if the Protestants will not take the pains to declare a Successor for themselves 't is plain the Foreign Papist Princes will declare one for them to the purpose and first they declare for Religion he ought not to be a Protestant but a Catholick Then for Blood he ought not to be a Brittish but a Foreign Blood And in all Countries the Pope's Laws shall be a Salique Law to exclude Protestant Blood from Catholick Dominions and to intitle Catholick Blood to Protestant Dominions so as if Protestant Princes Marry with Catholicks they must play all against nothing Most Excellent Nonsence in the Papist Law of Successions 11. Danger of Counterfeit Wills and Testaments It exposes Succession to Counterfeit Wills and Testaments Though the Law is sufficiently clear That Kingdoms which are Publick Offices of Trust are not devisable by last Will and Testament as private Inheritances are yet because the Papist Power of the Sword may pretend to any thing unless the Protestant Subjects have an Act of Parliament declaring a Protestant Successor as a Sheild under God to defend themselves against it the same will be necessary to prevent even this Danger likewise For what Monarch or Emperor is so great as when sickness hath arrested and bound him with the fatal Cords of his Death-Bed where every Woman every Priest every Doctor are his Gaolers can promise himself Liberty to make a free Will Yea that he shall not have less than a private Subject when his Keepers shall make use of his own Publick Name and Authority against himself to exclude from him those faithful Friends who will force their way through to relieve a private Person from those Furies of his Bed which Torment him Or how can he promise himself though he make his Will in his perfect Health that as soon as he is dead it shall not be destroyed For did not H. 8. use all the Caution possible to secure his Will after his Death Had he not an Act of Parliament which gave him Power to Nominate Successors by his Will and made it High Treason for any to prejudice the Titles of the Persons so Nominated Did he not solemnly inrole it in Chancery yet when before the Death of Queen Elizabeth an inquisition was made after the Will of H. 8. to see whom he had Nominated to succeed The Will of H. 8. stoln off the file where inroled in case she should happen to dye without Issue they found the same to be taken by Bribe or Stoln off the Cursitors File by some who intended to advance their own Title for there were Sixteen Titles then on foot Osborn Tit. Queen Eliz. 99. Plotina the Empress Wife of the Emperor Trajan who was with him at his Decease Adrian got the Empire by a Counterfeit Will. in regard she had a great favour for young Adrian Plotted with him to help him to the Empire and to that end feigned that Trajan had adopted him for his Son and shewed a Counterfeit Instrument or Writing to â—â—at Effect which matter was so cunningly handled that it took such effect as she desired And the Army presently swore Obedience to Adrian notwithstanding he was absent at Antioch in Syria where he was left General who being advertised thereof and the Legions whereof he was General consenting thereto he presently wrote to the Senate intreating to be Confirmed in the Empire And when the Senate had received his Letter and understood what had passed his Request was easily granted for there was no denyal by old Men to young Men when once they had given so great a share of the Sword as they had not reteined a greater in their own hands wherewith to recall the same when they thought good William the Conqueror pretended a Will and Promise and thereby excluded Edgar Atheling the right Heir William the Conqueror likewise pretended a Will and a Promise of the Kingdom of England from Edward the Confessor which though Edward notwithstanding his Holiness had no Authority or any thing to do to give away from the Right Heir Edgar Atheling nor to enslave the Land to a Foreigner yet it s known how ill effect these Pretences had and the same might have been prevented if Edgar had been declared Successor by Act of Parliament in the life-time of Edward It incourages Usurpers For the ascertaining the Heir by Supreme Authority 12. Danger of Incouraging Usurpers wherein both the Assent both of the King and People is included takes away and the not ascertaining feeds Pretenders and their Parties with hopes So Tacitus lib. 3. Annal. Sic Cohibere pravos aliorum spes rebatur by declaring a Successor in certain he thought the wicked hopes of others were Checkt and in another place Plena Caesarum Domus Juvenis filius Nepotes adulti moram cupitis Sejani adferebant his House full of Caesars his Son in Strength of Youth his Nephews grown up deterred the Ambition of Sejanus And the best remedy King David used against Adonijah Proclaiming himself was to Proclaim Solomon In Titles Doubtful 13. Danger it leaves an Interregnum The infinite mischiefs of Interregnums either on doubtful Titles of Successions or on doubtful Powers or Elections appearing in Histories are too many to be here recited and lest some should be so far deceived as to believe there can be no Interregnum by the Law of England he is desired not to place his Faith in the Fictions of Lawyers That the King never dyes and there is no Interregnum lest if by not declaring a Successor in his Life-time whom God grant long to live the contrary Effects appear when it will be too late to provide a Remedy It Cantons Kingdoms 14. Danger of Cantonizing Kingdoms For so writes Justin of Alexander the Great Alexander rogatus quem Haeredem faceret Imperii respondit dignissimum qua voce veluti Bellicum inter Amicos cecinisset aut malum discordia immisisset ita omnes in aemulationem consurgunt ambitione vulgi tacitum favorem Militum Alexander being asked whom he would make Successor to his Empire answered The most Worthy By which as though amongst his own Friends he had sounded a Charge to Battel one against another or had thrown the Apple of Discord amongst them so did they rise together in
theirs Princes of the Scots The French Kings theirs Dauphins with so little doubt of Danger thereby that they rather look on the same as the greatest Security of themselves their Families and Kingdoms to have their Eldest Sons declared Successors in their Life-time but always as is said this is true only where the Eldest Sons are declared and not where contrary to the order of Nature Younger Sons or Collateral Heirs are prefer'd before them or to disherit them Object 5. The Ottoman Emperors never declare a Successor Answ They are ill Presidents to be followed for the not declaring of a Successor causeth all those Bloody Butcheries of Fathers of their own Sons And Brothers one of another and gives the Janizaries Power to sell the Empire to that Son or Brother who will give most Money for the same which the Emperors would gladly reform if they were able and declare their Successors as other Princes do were they not over-power'd by their own Slaves as appears Turk Hist 479. Selymus The Ottoman Emperors why they declared no Successors a Younger Son of Bajazet the Second was made by his Father Governor of the Kingdom of Trapezond and Married without his Fathers liking the Daughter of Mahometes a mighty King of the Tartars called Precopenses Selymus by the assistance of his Father-in-Law provided a great Fleet and Army Pretending but not Intending War on Hungary Bajazet receiving Advertisement of Selymus his Army and that he had left Trapezond and was come over into Europe suspecting his Design notwithstanding his Pretences to be against himself yet not seeming to take notice thereof sends Embassadors to disswade him from the Hungarian War and to perswade him to return peaceably to his former Government but without effect for he continues his March onwards towards his Father In the mean time Bajazet moved the rather with the fear of Selymus resolved on that which he had long time in his Mind deeply Consider'd in regard he was aged and sickly to resign the Empire to Achomates his eldest Son and proposeth the same to the Soldiers but they being Corrupted before with Money by Selymus Cunningly seeming to commend Achomates yet would neither yield that Bajazet should resign or nominate him for his Successor And the chief Reasons they alleadged were That the same was neither according to the Custom of the Ottoman Kings nor for the behoof of the Men of War who should thereby be defrauded of the Rewards usually granted unto them during the time of vacancy of the Empire arising from the Spoil taking of them who are of Religions different from the Turks for it is a Custom that immediately on the Death of the Turkish Emperors all the Jews and Christians which dwell at Constantinople Pera Hadrianople Thessalonica and Prusa especially Merchants Exposed unto the Injuries of the Turks are by the Janizaries and other Soldiers of the Court spoiled of all their Wares and Goods and became unto them a Prey neither will they give their Oath of Allegiance unto the new Emperor until he grant them their Prey and Swear by his Head to Pardon all their Outrages before Committed When Bajazet saw his Men of War generally to oppose themselves against the Nomination of his Successor he tryed what Money would do with them and promise them Five hundred Thousand Duckets if they would stand favourable to Achomates and accept him for their Soveraign but he could not move them for they assured themselves of greater Rewards in Pay and Plunder from Selymus So with Grief and Patience he put up the Matter hoping for a fitter Opportunity to effect what he desired Selymus in the mean time under divers pretences marcheth on towards his Father and Corrupted the greatest part of his Council with Money and great Promises to betray him and advance Selymus to the Empire only Cherseogleson and old faithful Bassa adviseth Bajazet to Chastise the Rebellion of his unnatural younger Son and to give him Battel wherein Selymus was overthrown and the greatest part of his Army Slain Achomates hearing of all the trouble had happened between his Father and Brother Selymus writes to him desiring him to dispatch his long Determin'd and Promised Resignation of the Empire Bajazet of himself still continued desirous of the Translating the Empire to Achomates and making no great Secret of it Commanded Galleys to be provided to Transport Achomates for that end from Scutari where he then was to Constantinople but the Bassa's and Souldiers Corrupted by Selymus's Money would not suffer him whereupon he writes to Achomates how the matter stood and that he should therefore return from Scutari to his old Charge of Amasia until he might with bounty win the Minds of the Souldiers and great Men to effect his advancement with less Danger Achomates thus deceived of his hopes Complained of his Father how he had deceived him and made him a By-word and Laughing-stock to the World and meditating either Revenge or Defence against his Brother raiseth an Army and on Contumacy when Commanded to Disband is by the Incitation of Selymus with his Party proclaimed Traitor by his Father and Bajazet is so over-persuaded by the Conspirators That he sends home for his younger traiterous Son Selymus Pardons him and makes him General of his Armies against Achomates the elder Son Selymus having received the Army they Corrupted by him Proclaim him Emperor Selymus thereupon Poisons his Aged Father Bajazet being almost Fourscore years of Age and Murders his Brothers and Five of his eldest Brother's Sons From whence may be observed 1. The Great Error of Bajazet who gave his younger Son Selymus a Kingdom and so great Power with it that he was able to be a Competitor against his eldest Son and to raise a Rebellion against himself which is Inconsistent with the Right of Primogeniture and Divides the Empire into many Empires 2. That Excessive Treasure given to a younger Brother gives him Power to Corrupt both the Council and Army of his Father who gave it him 3. Bajazet by setting the younger Son in Contention with he eldest he lost the Fidelity of both and was destroyed between them 4. He did very imprudently to promise his eldest Son the Resignation of the Empire and ought only to have declared him Successor after his Death 1 Bajazet by preferring his younger Son before his eldest exposed him to be Murdered unless he took Arms in defence of his Life but more Imprudently to break his Promise to him and thereby to Expose him a Publick Laughing-stock to the World and a certain mark to be Murdered by his Brother Selymus unless he took Arms in his own Defence to prevent it 5. That by probabillity if he could have effected the Declaring of his eldest Son Successor and given only Moderate Portions to his younger Sons as the Chynoys and Aethiopians Emperors gives theirs such miserable Murders might not have fallen on himself his Sons and Nephews The like Destruction is before observed to have