Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	elizabeth_n	queen_n	scot_n	2,873	5	9.6325	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39852	A letter from a gentleman of quality in the country, to his friend, upon his being chosen a member to serve in the approaching Parliament, and desiring his advice being an argument relating to the point of succession to the Crown : shewing from Scripture, law, history, and reason, how improbable (if not impossible) it is to bar the next heir in the right line from the succession.	E. F.	1679 (1679)	Wing F14; ESTC R19698	29,065	21

Persons and their Rights that in any wise may or might claim an Interest to the same Crown in Possession or otherwise shall during the Life of the Queen's Majesty be judged a High Traitor and therefore the same Queen had little reason to scruple the passing a Bill of this Nature But I much doubt whether a Common Law-Prince who owes his Title only to God Nature and the immutable Customs of the Nation unless under like Circumstances with King Henry the Eighth would have assented to an Act so derogatory to the Regalties for the manifest Inconveniencies that might insue to himself and posterity by such Assent and Condescention Some of which I have discovered in the beginning of this Discourse in my second Reason why the Succession of the Crown is annexed to Proximity of Blood Secondly Wise men do not only consider Things that are acted but more especially the Season and Junctures of Time when those things were acted and Sir Edward Coke a great Master in the Science of our Law doth frequently admonish us That the true Scope and Design of our Statute-Laws are oftentimes not at all intelligible without the help of the Chronicles and Memoirs of that Age wherein the said Statute-Laws were made Of which there cannot be a more pregnatn Instance than this here And therefore I will in Charity believe That the Contrivers of this Objection did never rightly inform themselves of the History and true Reason of making this Statute which in Truth was this Some time before this Statute Mary Queen of Scots Dowager of France and the Mother of our King James being discomfited in Battel by her own rebellious Vassals of Scotland she like a Dove pursued by Vultures fled into the bosom of her Kinswoman Elizabeth of England for Protection Elizabeth who inherited her Father's Malaversion to the House of Scotland and contrary to those Royal Sympathies which one Sovereign Prince ought to have for another in Distress and indeed against the Rules of common Hospitality commits Mary to a loathsom Prison The Pope with some of the Catholick Princes and others of her Friends thought this was no very kind Treatment and therefore endeavour not onely to set her at liberty but also to advance her to the Throne the generality of Mankind in that Age looking upon the said Mary's Title to be much clearer than that of the Queen in possession the later being bastardiz'd and render'd incapable of the Crown by solemn Act of Parliament which still stood unrepeal'd and therefore valid in Law at leastwise but a Statute-Queen as I prov'd before And the former deriving as is shew'd above by the Common Law and a direct true line from Margaret the eldest Daughter of King Henry the Seventh and Elizabeth his Queen And besides in the very year this Statute was made there was a Marriage warmly prosecuted between the said Queen Elizabeth and Henry Duke of Anjou who afterwards became King of France upon the death of his Brother Charles the Ninth and no small care was then taken for Establishment of the Succession upon the Issues proceeding from the same Marriage And there is a remarkable Clause among others in the same Statute of 13 viz. That every person or persons of what Degree and Nation soever they be shall during the Queen's Life declare or publish that they have any right to enjoy the Crown of England during the Queen's Life shall be disenabled to enjoy the Crown in Succession Inheritance or otherwise after the Queen's Death Which Clause was most apparently contriv'd against the same Mary and her Son King James So that the plain scope and design of this Statute was utterly and for ever to exclude and disinherit the same Mary Queen of Scots and all her Posterity and to extinguish absolutely that Right to the English Crown which the Laws of God and Nature and the Common Law of England had given to her and them And therefore how any man that pretends Loyalty or Allegiance to His Gracious Majesty that now is who derives his Title lineally from the said Mary Queen of Scots can object this Statute was a Precedent for Exclusion of the next Heir by Act of Parliament I cannot understand And the Objector may do well to consider how far he may enforce this Objection without hazard to his Person and Estate for no man can maintain the validity of this Statute without manifest Derogation and Injury unto his Majesty's Title Thirdly To affirm that the Parliament hath no Power to bind the Succession of the Crown in point of Descent and to affirm that the Parliament hath no power to exclude the next Heir of the Bloud Royal is the same Proposition Now I have proved above That the Succession of the Crown is annex'd to Proximity of Bloud by the Laws of God and Nature and that Acts of Parliament contrariant to those Laws are void So then the Case is no more than this An Act of Parliament ordains that no Person under a certain Penalty shall dare to affirm That Statute-Laws contrary to those of God and Nature are null and void I think no man ever did or doth or will doubt but that such Act of Parliament is absolutely void in it self and that the Judges are oblig'd to expound it so when ever it comes before them in Point of Judgment Lastly This Act of 13 being a Law made as I have proved above in diminution or rather in open and hostile Defiance of the Title of Scotland to this Crown it was by tacit and implied consent of the Law and the whole Nation utterly abrogated upon the first moment of the happy Union of the two Crowns in the person of King James or at leastwise by the solemn and express Repeal here of all hostile and unkind Laws between England and Scotland of which I am sure this of 13 was none of the least I shall draw towards a Conclusion with a certain apposite Note which one of our Latin Historians makes upon the nine days Reign of Jane Grey and the easie Admission of Queen Mary to the Crown Tali constanti veneratione nos Angli legitimos Reges prosequimur ut ab corum debito obsequio c. Such and so constant a Veneration saith he have we Englishmen for our lawful Princes that we are not to be drawn from our Allegiance and Loyalty to them by any colours or specious pretences whatsoever no not with the Bait even of Religion it self of which matter this Case of Jane may be a memorable and plain Instance For though the Foundations of her Government were laid as firm as was possible and the Superstructure also wrought with all the Art and Cunning in the world yet as soon as ever the lawful and undoubted Heir of the Crown appear'd and shew'd her self to the People all this fine and curious Frame presently fell to the ground and was ruin'd as it were in the twincle of an Eye and that principally by the

the true and legal Title abiding in the House of York See to prove this Brook Parl. pl. 105. 1 H. 7. 4. v. The second Instance is that of King Henry the Seventh This King while he was Earl of Richmond together with many Lords and Commons that took his part were all attainted of High Treason by the Parliament of Richard the Third Afterwards at the Battel of Bosworth the Earl obtain'd the Victory and slew Richard in the Field and on the same day assum'd the Crown upon him and presently afterward summon'd a Parliament On the first day of this Parliament say our Books of Law and Histories all the Judges of England were assembled in the Exchequer Chamber to resolve a very rare and perplex'd Case viz. What should be done about the reversal of the said Parlementary Attaindors of the King and divers Lords and many Knights Citizens and Burgesses that were to sit in Parliament that day And after mature Deliberation had among themselves they all Resolved That for all the Lords and Commons that were attainted they advised them not to sit in Parliament till an Act of Parliament was passed by the other Lords and Commons not attainted and assented to by the King for the reversal of those Attaindors and after the Reversal then all of them to sit in the Houses For that it was not convenient that any should sit as Judges in those Houses that were attainted But concerning the King himself they unanimously Resolved That the Crown takes away all defects in Bloud and Incapacities by Parliament And that from the time the King did assume the Crown the Fountain was cleared and all the said Attaindors and Corruptions of Bloud and other Impediments absolutely discharged And yet the said King Henry the Seventh was onely King de facto also the legal Title as I have before observed abiding in the House of York See to prove all this the Books of 1 H. 7. 4. v. Fitz. Parl. pl. 2. Brook P. Statutes pl. 37. 175. Plowden's Com. 238. v. Lord Barkley's case Co. 7 Rep. 12. ● Calvin's case Co. 1 Inst 16. a. Jenk centuries 203. Lord Bacon's Hist H. 7 fol. 13. All in express terms And if the Influence and Operation of Law be so forcible and vigorous in Cases of colourable and specious Title onely as that of the said King Henry the Seventh was as I shall demonstrate at large in the sequel of this Discourse how much more will it be where there is Proximity of Bloud and undoubted Right The last Instance is that of Queen Elizabeth an Instance of fresh and recent memory This Princess had been bastardiz'd and render'd incapable of Succession to the Crown by solemn Act of Parliament and yet notwithstanding upon the Death of Queen May the said Queen Elizabeth succeeded to the Crown And Sir Nicholas Bacon Lord Keeper of the Great Seal and Oracle of the Law in that Age and upon whom the Queen altogether relied in matter of Law and who no doubt in a Case of that Importance had consulted all the Judges of England was clear of Opinion saith Cambden That there needed not any formal Repeal of the said Act as there never was any because saith the same Author the Law of England had long before pronounced Coronam semel susceptam omnes omnino Defectas tollere That the Crown once obtain'd doth absolutely wipe out all Defects whatsoever And in this Point the Civil Law agrees also with the Common Law of England for Vpian a famous Doctor tells us That the possession of the Crown purgeth all Derects and maketh good the Act of him in Authority although he wanteth both Capacity and Right Moreover by the Laws of England the right Heir becomes absolute and perfect King in the very moment that the Crown descends upon him though he happen to be at the same time in the remotest parts of the World and before he be actually Crown'd And therefore King Edward the first though at the time of his Father's Death he was absent in the Holy Land in War against the Infidels yet he was immediately acknowledg'd here by the whole Realm for their King And in his return homewards did Homage to the French King for the Lands which he held of him in France and repressed certain of his Rebellious Subjects in Gascoign and yet he was not crown'd till almost two years afterwards And the Case of his Sacred Majesty that now is was very like for he began his Reign from the moment of that fatal and impious Stroke given to his Royal Father of ever glorious Memory and yet his present Majesty was not at that time in England And this is expresly resolved to be the Law of this Nation by all the Judges of England Mich. 1. Eliz. Dyer's Rep. 165. a. So King Henry the sixth Edward the fourth Henry the seventh summon'd Parliaments condemn'd Traitors made Grants and did all other Acts which a crowned King may do before their several Coronations And the like was done by King Henry the eighth Edward the sixth Queen Mary Queen Elizabeth King James King Charles the first and His Gracious Majesty that now is For coronation is but an Ornament and Solemnization of the Royal Descent but no part of the Title and the Kings of England are to all Intents and Purposes compleat and perfect Kings before Coronation and so it was expresly resolved by all the Judges of England 1 o Jacobi in the Cases of Watson Clarke and Sir Walter Raleigh which in a matter so clear shall suffice Having thus as I conceive made my Point good and impregnable Viz. That the next Heir of the Blood cannot be excluded from the Succession by Act of Parliament I come now to answer certain Objections which some Men I perceive are fond of and do not a little glory therein and the most considerable of them are three in Number First say they there are several Instances of Kings of this Realm whose Titles to the Crown depended purely upon the Election of the People and Acts of Parliament and not upon Proximity of Blood and Inherent Birth-right as to go no higher the Titles of King John Henry the fourth Henry the seventh Moreover Henry the eighth entail'd the Crown upon himself and his Children by Act of Parliament And these Establishments by Parliament were look'd upon as good Titles to the Kings in Possession and bars against the next Heirs I Answer they were never look'd upon as good Titles to the Kings in Possession or bars against the right Heirs neither ought they to be deemed so as doth most evidently appear by the former part of this Discourse And which I shall now farther demonstrate by Enquiry into the Titles and Circumstances of each particular King mentioned in the Objection First for King John it is plain he was King de facto but not de jure for he invaded the Crown against the Right of his Nephew