Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	daughter_n	france_n	king_n	10,441	5	4.3751	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A35923	A Dialogue concerning the rights of Her Most Christian Majesty	Bilain, Antoine, d. 1672.; Bourzeis, Amable de, 1606-1672.; Joly, Guy, fl. 1648-1655.	1667 (1667)	Wing D1362; ESTC R33450	36,049	79

French Hitherto Gentlemen we have shewed you several Nullities against Law but now you shall see in two Clauses of the Renunciation Errors against nature which I am confident will a little surprize you Flem. I impatiently expect these Clauses for I do not remember that I ever read any such strange passages in the Contract French One of those Clauses import that the Queen and her Posterity shall be for ever excluded from all the Estates which either are or shall ever be under the Dominion of Spain so that if the Race of his Catholick Majesty should fail Strangers are to be preferred before her and her Issue The other imports that this Princess shall not be excluded from all those rights but only in case that she have Children by this Marriage with his most Christian Majesty But in case she have none her right shall be intirely preserved I dare once more Gentlemen challenge you in all your Readings by any instances in former Ages to parallel these two Clauses if not to say Prodigies Flem. What is it that you find so strange in them French Renunciations were not introduced but for the preservation of Families and yet by the first of these Clauses the Father makes use of it only to the destruction of his Family in preferring Strangers before his own Blood Renunciations were never authorized but in favour to the Male-children and yet by this clause 't is extended not only in favour to the Daughters but to the younger ones in prejudice to the Queen who is the Eldest Pray tell me can a Father more abuse a Renunciation then by making it an instrument to destroy his own Family contrary to the obligation and nature of all Renunciations which are never permitted him but only to preserve it But again what is the meaning of the latter Clause which dis-inherits the Queen in case she have no Children but that Spain would turn the blessing which Heaven might bestow upon this Glorious Marriage into a curse Certainly Nature which always tends to the Conservation of the species cannot without a blush behold so Exorbitant a Clause which would prefer barrenness before fruitfulness Marriage which only proposes to its self the birth of Children cannot endure the scandal of dis-inheriting a Mother for having Sons and Daughters which are the blessings of Heaven The Canon and Civil Laws which are so severe against whatsoever shall touch upon the liberty honour or fruitfulness of Marriage cannot without horrour behold a Clause so injurious to the intention and dignity of Marriages especially this which is one of the most August and Renowned under Heaver Methinks such policy cannot expect other then the disdain of all the World which reduces the Illustrious Princess to the hard choice of mourning all her days a Barrenness that would hinder her from being Mother to a King of France or a fruitfulness by Marriage which would cut her off from being Queen of Spain But this also exposes the whole Monarchy of Castile to Civil and Intestine Wars which are not like to end but by the ruine and destruction of that Crown For supposing the Catholick King should dye in his minority at a time when the Queen should have Children by the most Christian King and that afterwards these Children dye shall the Queen by vertue of this Clause go and dis-inherit her younger Sister who shall have taken possession of the Crown and received their Homages accordingly Germ. This Clause does infinitely surprize me Flem. Yet 't is not without president since in the year 1615. Anne of Austria Infanta of Spain made the like Renunciation by her contract of Marriage with Lewis the 13. King of France French This example reaches not at all our Case For Anne of Austria had 4 Brothers of the whole blood at the time of her Renunciation viz. Philip Charles Ferdinand and Alphonso whereas Maria Theresa our Princess had none she being the sole remainder of that bed Anne of Austria had no estate fallen to her Maria Theresa had the inheritance of her Mother Don Balthazar her Brother which then became hers Anne of Austria received of the pure bounty of her Father the five hundred thousand Crowns of Gold given her for her Portion Maria Theresa had due to her in a debt upon account the sum of 500000 Crowns of Gold promis'd to her in satisfaction for the Marriage Portion of Queen Elizabeth her Mother Anne of Austria received her Portion by way of exchange for another of the same value made to Elizabeth of France who was the same day Married to the Prince of Spain since King Philip the 4th Maria Theresa never received any part of what was promis'd her In fine Anne of Austria renounced upon a pretention which cannot be found in this case for there being then a double Marriage made between France and Spain the Spaniards who affected much to have an equality observed between both parties agreed that Anne of Austria might be excluded from the Crown of Castile as Elizabeth of France was from that of France by the Salique Law which admits of none but Males You see then how much these Instances differ besides this example stands alone against the practice of all former Ages and against the Fundamental Laws of State for it cannot be found either in Spain England Scotland Swedland or any other Soveraignties that are inheritable by Females that any of their Daughters were ever obliged by their Marriage to renounce their hopes of succession to the Crown in the Order it should fall to them Louis VII and Louis VIII Kings of France Married with Infantas of Spain and no such Renunciation ever required The 3 Daughters of Ferdinand King of Spain the 4 Daughters of Philip the I. the 2 Daughters of Charles the V. the 2 Daughters of Philip II. the 6 Danghters of Ferdinand I. all of them Infantas of Spain and Married to Forraign Princes never made any Renunciation so that this one only example is so far from authorizing this procedure of Spain that on the other side this particular instance of a double Marriage then contracted and the want of an actual Estate fallen to the person of Anne of Austria carries with it such an exception as confirms the justice of all ancient example besides that which was never but once done is not to be drawn in to president especially on this occasion where the Renuntiation made by Anne of Austria being essentially null can give them but little advantage because an Act passed contrary to publick Right and the Fundamental Maximes of a State ought not to be drawn into an Example or Consequence Flem. I confesse the Example is rare but is not the happinesse of a publick peace and the Ratification of the Clause by the King of France sufficient enough to cover the faults that may be found in the Ratification French Such kind of Agreements will rather violate than establish a peace and I may say further that 't is a prophanation