Selected quad for the lemma: england_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A29172
|
The great point of succession discussed with a full and particular answer to a late pamphlet, intituled, A brief history of succession, &c.
|
Brady, Robert, 1627?-1700.
|
1681
(1681)
|
Wing B4191; ESTC R19501
|
63,508
|
40
|
speak not Reason For what Power hath the State to elect while any that is living hath Right to succeed But such a Successor is not the Duke of Lancaster as descended from * So call'd from a Cross he used to wear upon his Back Edmund Crouchback the Elder Son of King Henry the Third tho' put by the Crown for Deformity of his Body For who knows not the Falseness of this Allegation Seeing it is a thing notorious that this Edmund was neither the Elder Brother nor yet Crook-back'd but of a goodly Personage and without any Deformity And your selves cannot forget a thing so lately done who it vvas that in the Fourth year of King Richard vvas declared by Parliament to be Heir to the Crovvn in case King Richard should die without Issue But why then is not that Claim made because Silent Leges inter Arma what disputing of Titles against the stream of Power But however it is extreme injustice that King Richard should be condemned without being heard or once allowed to make his Defence And now my Lords I have spoken thus at this time that you may consider of it before it be too late for as yet it is in your Power to undo that justly which you have unjustly done Thus spoke that Loyal and Good Prelate but to little purpose though there was neither Protestation nor Exception made against this Speech which certainly there would have been had there not been as much Truth as Boldness in vvhat he said And tho' Henry the Fourth did afterwards get the Inheritance of the Crown and Realm of England setled upon himself for Life and the Remainder entailed upon his four Sons by Name and the Issue of their Bodies yet that cannot at all make for my Adversaries purpose since it amounted to no more than a Confirmation of him in the Throne or if it did vve may vvell suppose that a Prince that vvas conscious to himself hovv unjustly he had gain'd his Crown would not be very unwilling to take such a way tho' in derogation to his Prerogative to secure himself if possible tho' not out of an Opinion that they could give him a better Right than they had but because 't is natural to suppose they would upon any occasion be ready to defend what they so solemnly had enacted Come we next to Henry the Fifth who this Gentleman says was Elected But how notoriously false that Assertion of his is will appear from hence that first there was no Parliament called till after his Coronation and in the next place that if the Act of Parliament made in the Seventh Year of Henry the Fourth had so great a Force and Vertue as he says it had it was needless nor can he prove any such thing from that careless and negligent Historian Polydore For Concilium Principum with him does not always signifie a Parliament as any one that has read him which I dare say he never did will perceive nor does his Phrase creare Regem import any more than the King's Coronation besides 't is most untrue which he affirms that Allegiance was never sworn before his Time till after a King was Crowned For the contrary appears from King John and Edward the First Nay 't is undeniably true that the Kings of England have exercised all manner of Royal Jurisdiction precedent to all Ceremony or any Formality whatsoever and that the Death of one King has in that very Moment given Livery and Seisin of the Royalty to the next Heir and by vertue of that Richard the First as a Mark of his Sovereignty immediately on his Father's Death restor'd the Earl of Leicester to his whole Estate Henry the Fifth being dead he was without any Opposition admitted to the Throne although but an Infant but in the Thirty Ninth Year of this King in open Parliament Richard Duke of York the true and rightful Heir to the Crown of England and France made his Challenge and Demand of it as being next Heir to Lionell Duke of Clarence Elder Brother to John of Gaunt from whom descended the House of Lancaster but to this Claim of his it was answered by the King's Friends That the same Crowns were by Act of Parliament Entailed upon Henry the Fourth and the Heirs of his Body from whom King Henry the Sixth did lineally descend * Rot. Parl. 39 H. 6. n. 10. c. The which Act say they as it is in the Record is of Authority to defeat any manner of Title made to any Person To which the Duke of York answerably replies That if King Henry the Fourth might have obtained and enjoyed the said Crowns of England and France by title of Inheritance Descent or Succession he neither needed nor would have desired or made them to be granted to him in such wise as they be by the said Act the which taketh no place nor is of any Force or Effect mind that against him that is Right Inheritor of the said Crowns as it accordeth with God's Laws and all Natural Laws And this Claim and Answer of the Duke of York is expresly acknowledged and recognized by this Parliament to be Good True Just Lawful and Sufficient and 't is agreed that Henry shall hold the Crown during his Life and the Duke of York in the mean time to be reputed and proclaimed Heir Apparent So that we have here as much as can be desired a Parliament not only declaring that a Title to the Crown ought to derive it self only from the Laws of God and Nature and not from any Civil Sanction and acknowledging in at the Bargain that it is beyond the Reach of any Humane Legislative Power to debar and exclude any one that justly claims by such a Right But to â— proceed upon Edward the Fourth's coming to the Crown a Parliament conven'd in the first year of his Reign does acknowledge and recognize his Title in these words as the * Rot. Parl. 1 Ed. 4. n. 8. c. Record has it Knowing also certainly without doubt and ambiguity that by Gods Law and Law of Nature He h. e. Edward the Fourth and none other is and ought to be true right-wise and natural Liege and Sovereign Lord. And that he was in Right from the Death of the said Noble and Famous Prince his Father very just King of the same Realm of England So here again we have another Parliament of the same mind with the last and I doubt not but we shall meet with more of 'em e're we have done When King Edward the Fourth was droven out of his Kingdom by Henry the Sixth 't is true the Crown was again entail'd if it may be properly so call'd upon him and his Heirs c. but still the proceeding was grounded upon the same Bottom with the former Here our Pamphleteer is pleased to make this drowsie Observation that both the Families of York and Lancaster claim'd a Title by Act of Parliament 't is true the latter did because they
to be Hereditary But our Pamphleteer by a strange way of arguing would make us believe that during the Heptarchy because they were governed by divers Laws that therefore their Rule of Succession must be divers as if because France Spain Moscevia Denmark and Sweden are governed by different Laws that therefore they ought not to be Hereditary however it seems he is convinced that some of those Royalties in the Heptarchy were not Elective and if he would but please to read over the History of those times and not rely too much upon Indexes he would be convinced that the Crown in them all did constantly descend to the next Heir unless he were unjustly put by either by some potent Neighbour or powerful and popular Rebell At length seven Kingdoms were united under Egbert and his posterity who succeeded him successively by Hereditary Right and so far are the Historians from constantly mentioning as we are with a great deal of confidence told pag. 1. that we hear not one word of it in any Historian of Account till Edgar had put himself at the Head of his Brother King Edwy's Subjects and had forced him to divide the Kingdom with him and truly I cannot but admire the impudence or at least ignorance of our Author in telling us that Egbert came to the Kingdom of the West Saxons by Election and that he was no way related to Brithric the last King when I dare confidently affirm that there is not one * M. West f. 145. Rex Brithricus filiam Offae Regis Merciorum in conjugium accepit cujas affinitate fultus Egbertum solum regalis prosapiae superstitem quem regni sui utilitatibus futurum metuebat hostem in Franciam fugavit Idem f. 155. defuncto itaque Rege Brithrico successit ei Egbertus in regnum 36 annis qui ex regali illius gentis prosapiâ originem ducens multa potenter regna suo adjecit imperio H. Huntingd. lib. 5. Flor. Wigorn. f. 563. An. 802. R. de Hoveden Annal. p. priore f. 413. Historian but sayes he was next Heir and only remaining Branch of that Royal Stem and that upon Brithric's death he succeeded him in his Kingdom without the least mention of any Election and I am sure a man can scarce look into any of the Monkish Writers but he shall find a †M. Westm f. 166. cum multis aliis Genealogy of this Egbert one of whose direct Ancestors was Brother to the great Ina King of the West Saxons who was descended in a direct Line from Cerdie the first King of that people in England but these kind of shifts whether ignorant or malicious I determine not are very frequent To Egbert succeeded his Eldest Son ** M. West f. 155. cui sc Egberto succedens Aethelulphus filius ejus 20 annis 5 mensibus imperavit Ethelwolf not by Election but Birth-right who out of a mistaken Devotion went to Rome and carrying his youngest Son †M. West f. 158. Alfred whom he loved above any of his Children with him and designing if possible to make him his Successor he prevailed with the Pope to Anoint and Crown him King which certainly was a very preposterous way of going about it if it had been in the peoples power to chuse their King for then the most natural way had been to make his Address to them that had the power in their hands ‖ Ibidem exorta est contra Regem praedictum magnatum quorundam conspiratio ita quod factâ conjuratione ab Aethelbaldo filio regis primogenito quod à Româ repatrians nunquam reciperetur in Regnum causa erat quod filium juniorem Aelfredum quasi aliis a sorte regni exclusis in Regem Romae secerat Coronari but however this Action of the Fathers so much alarm'd the Eldest Son Ethelbald that rather than he would so unjustly be deprived of his undoubted Right he resolved to deprive his Father of his Kingdom and upon this specious pretence raised so strong a Faction against him that the Father to bring him again to his Duty was forced to share his Kingdom with him and this Prince wisely considering that if he did not contribute toward the avoiding of it his death might be the occasion of a great deal of Bloodshed amongst his four Children by ††M. Westm f. 159. Aethelulphus de suo transitu ad vitam Universitatis cogitans nè filii ejus post obitum suum inter se disceptarent haereditariam scribere imperavit Epistolam in quâ regni inter filios Aethelbaldum Aethelbertum divisionem procuravit c. paulò postea Aethelberto filiorum secundo Regnum Cantiae cum Sussexiâ concessit filius ejus primogenitus Aethelbaldus in West-Saxiâ pro patre regnavit his Will in his life-time he ordained That his Lands should be distributed amongst his two younger Sons and Daughter but his ** H. Huntingd. Hist l. 5. f. 348. Aethelbaldo filio suo reliquit praedictus Rex nobilissimus sc Aethelusphus Regnum Haereditatium Westsexe Adelbricto filio suo alii reliquit Regnum Cantiae Estsexe Sudsexe Hereditary Kingdom of the West Saxons he bequeathed to his Eldest Son Ethelbald and the Kingdoms of Kent Essex and Sussex to his Second Son Ethelbert to be held in Fee of his Elder Brother and upon his death his Eldest Son Ethelbald succeeded him according to his Fathers Will he dying issueless Ethelbert as next in Blood sate upon the Throne and so his two younger Brethren Ethelred and Alfred by right of Inheritance and according to proximity of Blood successively came to the Crown Upon the whole matter it may be I think reasonably concluded not insisting upon the silence of History from these two particulars that the Kingdom was nothing less than Elective first because it is irrational to think that Ethelmolf would have pretended to have appointed and nominated a Successor if the Crown had not gone then by Birth-right And in the next place I cannot conceive why Alfred who was a kind of * Flor. Wigorn. fol. 587. Quo sc Aethelred supra memoratus Aelfredus qui usque ad id tempus venientibus fratribus suis fuerat secondarius totius regni gubernacula divino concedente nutu cum summâ omnium illius regni accolarum voluntate confestim suscepit Vicegerent to all his other Brethren should wait their Death before he took upon him the Government for if the Choice of the people had been sufficient to entitle him to the Crown he had never wanted that since he was their †Asser Menevens in vit Alfred f. 7. Quod sc Regnum etiam vivente fratre suo si dignaretur accipere facillimè cum omnium illius gentis accolarum potuerat invenire Darling all along especially if the Unction and Coronation by the Pope be considered for that though of no force or efficacy in it self yet might have been easily improved into