Selected quad for the lemma: king_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
king_n contrary_a house_n white_a 189,926 5 12.0585 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A56468 A conference about the next succession to the crown of England divided into two parts : the first containeth the discourse of a civil lawyer, how and in what manner propinquity of bloud is to be preferred : the second containeth the speech of a temporal lawyer about the particular titles of all such as do, or may, pretend (within England or without) to the next succession : whereunto is also added a new and perfect arbor and genealogy of the descents of all the kings and princes of England, from the Conquest to the present day, whereby each mans pretence is made more plain ... / published by R. Doleman. Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.; Allen, William, 1532-1594.; Englefield, Francis, Sir, d. 1596? 1681 (1681) Wing P568; ESTC R36629 283,893 409

There are 7 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

you have heard it proved of all Law-makers Philosophers Lawyers Divines and Governours of Commonwealhs who have set down in their Statutes and Ordinances that Kings shall swear and protest at their entrance to Government that they will observe and perform the conditions there promised and otherwise to have no Interest in that Dignity and Soveraignty By examples in like manner of all Realms Christian he declared how that often-times they have deposed their Princes for just causes and that God hath concurred and assisted wonderfully the same sending them commonly very good Kings after those that were deprived and in no Country more then in England it self yea in the very Line and Family of this King Richard whose Noble Grandfather King Edward the third was exalted to the Crown by a most solemn deposition of his predecessor King Edward the second wherefore in this point there can be little controversie and therefore we shall pass unto the second which is whether the causes were good and just for which this King Richard was esteemed worthy to be deposed And in this second point much more difference there is betwixt York and Lancaster and between the white Rose and the Red for that the House of York seeking to make the other odious as though they had entred by tyranny and cruelty doth not stick to avouch that King Richard was unjustly deposed but against this the House of Lancaster alledgeth first that the House of York cannot justly say this for that the chief Prince assistant to the deposing of King Richard was Lord Edmond himself Duke of York and head of that family together with Edward Earl of Rutland and Duke of Aumarl his eldest Son and Heir yea and his younger Son also Richard Earl of Cambridge Father to this Richard that now pretendeth for so do write both Stow Hollingshead and other Chroniclers of England that those Princes of the H●●●e of York did principally assist Henry Duke of Lancaster in getting the Crown and deposing King Richard and Polid●r speaking of the wicked Government of King Richard and of the first Cogitation about deposing him when King Henry of Lancaster was yet in France banished and seemed not to think of any such matter he hath these words Sed Edmundo Ebo●acensium duci ea res cum primis bilem commovit quod Rex omnia jam jura perverteret quod antea parricidio postea r●pints se obstrinx●sset c. That is this matter of the wicked Government of King Richard did principally offend his Uncle Edmond Duke of York for that he saw the King now to pe●srvert all Law and Equity and that as before he had defiled himself with Parricide that is with the murther of his own Uncle the Duke of Glocester Brother to this Edmond so now he intangled himself also with Rapine in that he took by violence the Goods and Inheritance of John of Gaunt late deceased which did belong to Henry Duke of Lancaster his Cousin-German By which words of Polidor as also for that the Duke of Lancaster coming out of Britany accompaned only with threescore persons as some stories say chose first to go into York shire and to enter at Ravenspur at the mouth of Humber as all the World knoweth which he would never have done if the Princes of York had not principally favoured him in that action all this I say is an evident argument that these Princes of the House of York were then the chief doers in this deposition and consequently cannot alledge now with reason that the said Richard was deposed uniustly Secondly the House of Lancaster alledgeth for the justifying of this deposition the opinions of all Historiographers that ever have written of this matter whether they be English French Dutch Latine or of any other Nation or Language who all with one accord do affirm that King Richards Government was intolerable and he worthy of deposition whereof he that will see more let him read Thomas of Walsingham and John Frosard in the life of King Richard Thirdly they of Lancaster do alledge the particular outrages and insolencies of King Richards Government and first the suffering himself to be carried away with evil counsel of his favorites and then the perverting of all Laws generally under his Government as before you have heard out of Polidor the joyning with his Minions for oppressing the Nobility of which Stow hath these words The King being at Bristow with Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland and Michael de la Pole Earl of Suffolk devised how to take away the Duke of Glocester the Earls of Arundel Warwick Darby and Nottingham and others whose deaths they conspired Thus saith Stow. And after they executed the most part of their devices for that Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester was made away without Law or Process the Earl of Arundel also was put to death and Warwick was banished and so was also Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury by like Injustice and the like was done to Henry Duke of Hertford and after of Lancaster and among other insolencies he suffered Robert Vere to dishonour and put from him his Wife a Noble and goodly young Lady as Stow saith and born of Lady Isabella King Richards Aunt that was daughter to King Edward the third and suffered Vere to marry another openly to her disgrace and dishonour of her Kindred And finally in the last Parliament that ever he held which was in the 21. year of his Reign commonly called the Evil Parliament he would needs have all authority absolute granted to certain favourites of his which Thomas Walsingham saith were not above 6 or 7. to determine of all matters with all full authority as if they only had been the whole Realm which was nothing indeed but to take all authority to himself only and Stow in his Chronicle hath these words following This Parliament began about the 15. of Sept. in the year 1397. at the beginning whereof Edward Stafford Bishop of Exeter Lord Chancellor of England made a proposition or Sermon in which he affirmed that the power of the King was alone and perfect of it self and those that do impeach it were worthy to suffer pain of the Law c. thus saith Stow by all which is evident how exorbitant and contrary to all Law and Equity this Kings Government was Fourthly and lastly those of Lancaster do alledge for justifying of this deprivation that Duke Henry was called home by express Letters of the more and better part of all the Realm and that he came wholly in a manner u●●rmed considering his person for that Frosard saith he had but three Ships only out of Britany and Walsingham saith he had but 15. Lances and 4●0 foot-men and the additions to Pol●●hronicon as before I noted do avouch that when he landed at Ravenspur in the County of York he had but threescore men in all to begin the Reformation of
in the House of York these men endeavour to shew all the contrary to wit that there was nothing else but suspition hatred and emulations among themselves and extreme cruelty of one against the other and so we see that as soon almost as Edward Duke of York came to be King George Duke of Clarence his younger Brother conspired against him and did help to drive him out again both from the Realm and Crown In recompence whereof his said elder Brother afterward notwithstanding all the reconciliation and many others that passed between them of new love and union caused him upon new grudges to be taken and murthered privily at Calis as all the World knoweth And after both their deaths Richard their third Brother murthered the two Sons of his said elder Brother and kept in prison whiles he lived the Son and H●ir of his second Brother I mean the young Earl of Warwick though he were but a very Child whom King Henry the seventh afterward put to death But King Henry the eighth that succeeded them passed all the rest in cruelty toward his own kindred for he weeded out almost all that ever he could find of the Bloud Royal of York and this either for emulation or causes of meer suspicion only For first of all he beheaded Edmond de la Pole Duke of Suffolk Son of his own Aunt Lady Elizabeth that was Sister to King Edward the fourth which Edward was Grandfather to King Henry as is evident The like destruction King Henry went about to bring to Richard de la Pole Brother to the said Edmond if he had not escaped his hands by flying the Realm whom yet he never ceased to pursue until he was slain in the battel of Pavia in service of the King of France by whose death was extinguished the noble house of the de la Poles Again the said King Henry put to death Edward Duke of Buckingham high Constable of England the Son of his great Aunt Sister to the Queen Elizabeth his Grandmother and thereby overthrew also that worthy House of Buckingham and after again he put to death his Cousen-jerman Henry C●urt●●y Marquess of Excester Son of the Lady Catherine his Aunt that was Daughter of King Edward the fourth and attained joyntly with him his Wife the Lady Gertrude taking from her all her goods lands and inheritance and committed to perpetual prison their only Son and Heir Lord Edward Courtney being then but a Child of seven years old which remained so there until many years after he was set at liberty and restored to his living by Queen Mary Moreover he put to death the Lady Margaret Plantagenet Countess of Salisbury Daughter of George Duke of Clarence that was Brother of his Grandfather King Edward the fourth and with her he put to death also her eldest Son and Heir Thomas Poole Lord Montague and committed to perpetual prison where soon after also he ended his life a little Infant named Henry Poole his Son and Heir and condemned to death by act of Parliament although absent Renald Poole Brother to the said Lord Montague Cardinal in Rome whereby he overthrew also the Noble House of Salisbury and Warwick neither need I to go further in this relation though these men do note also how Edward the sixth put to death two of his own Uncles the Seymers or at least it was done by his authority and how that under her Majesty that now is the Queen of Scotland that was next in kin of any other living and the chief titler of the House of York hath been put to death Lastly they do note and I may not omit it that there is no noble house standing at this day in England in the antient state of calling that it had and in that dignity and degree that it was in when the House of York entered to the Crown if it be above the State of a Barony but only such as defended the right and interest of the Houses of Lancaster and that all other great Houses that took part with the House of York and did help to ruine the House of Lancaster are either ceased since or exti●pated and overthrown by the same House of York it self which they assisted to get the Crown and so at this present they are either united to the Crown by confiscation or transferred to other lineages that are strangers to them who possessed them before As for example the ancient Houses of England that remain at this day and were standing when the House of York began their title are the House of Arundel Oxford Northumberland Westmerland and Shrewsbury for all others that are in England at this day above the dignity of Barons have been advanced since that time and all these five houses were these that principally did stick unto the House of Lancaster as is evident by all English Chronicles For that the Earl of Arundel brought in King Henry the fourth first King of the House of Lancaster and did help to place him in the Dignity-Royal coming out of France with him The Earl of Oxford and his Son the Lord Vere were so earnest in the defence of King Henry the sixth as they were both slain by King Edward the fourth and John Earl of Oxford was one of the principal assistants of Henry the seventh to take the Crown from Richard the third The House of Northumberland also was a principal aider to Henry the fourth in getting the Crown and two Earls of that name to wit Henry the second and third were slain in the quarrel of King Henry the sixth one in the battel of St. Albans and the other of Saxton and a third Earl named Henry the fourth fled into Scotland with the said King Henry the sixth The House of Westmerland also was chief advancer of Henry the fourth to the Crown and the second Earl of that House was slain in the party of Henry the sixth in the said battel of Saxton and John Earl of Shrewsbury was likewise slain in defence of the title of Lancaster in the battel of N●rthampton And I omit many other great services and faithful endeavoure which many Princes of these five noble ancient houses did in the defence of the Lancastrian Kings which these men say that God hath rewarded wi●● continuance of their houses unto this day But on the contrary side these men do note that all the old houses that principally assisted The title of York are now extinguished and that chiefly by the Kings themselves of that house as for example the principal Peers that assisted the family of York were M●●●ray Duke of Norfolk de la Poole Duke of Suffolk the Earl of Sa●is●u●y and the Earl of Warwi●k of all which the event was this John Moubray Duke of N●rfolk the first considerate of the House of York died soon after the exaltation of Edward the fourth without Issue and so that name
before hath been declared and preferreth it self in degree of Propinquity not only before the aforesaid two Houses of Scotland and Clarence but also before this other part of the House of Suffolk I mean the Family of Hartford though descended of the elder Daughter for that the Countess of Darby doth hold her self one degree nearer in descent than are the other Pretenders of Hartford as hath been shewed And albeit there want not many Objections and Reasons of some against this pretence of the House of Darby besides that which I have touched before yet for that they are for the most part personal Impediments and do not touch the right or substance of the title or any other important reason of State concerning the Common-wealth but only the mislike of the persons that pretend and of their Life and Government I shall omit them in this place for that as in the beginning I promised so I shall observe as much as in me lies to utter nothing in this Conference of ours that may justly offend and much less touch the Honour and Reputation of any one Person of the Bloud-Royal of our Realm when the time of admitting or excluding cometh then will the Realm consider as well of their Persons as of their Rights and will see what account and satisfaction each person hath given of his former life and doings and according to that will proceed as is to be supposed But to me in this place it shall be enough to treat of the first point which is of the Right and Interest pretended by way of Succession And so with this I shall make an end of these Families and pass over to others that do yet remain CHAP. VII Of the Houses of Clarence and Britany which contain the ●laims of the Earl of Huntington with the Pooles as also of the Lady Infanta of Spain and others of those Families HAving declared the Claims Rights and Pretences which the two Noble Houses of Scotland and Suffolk descended of the two Daughters of King Henry VII have or may have to the Succession of England with intention afterward to handle the House of Portugal apart which pretendeth to comprehend in it self the whole Body or at l●ast the first and principal Branch of the ancient House of Lancaster it shall not be amiss perhaps by the way to treat in this one Chapter so much as appertaineth to the two several Houses of Clarence and Britany for that there is less to be said about them then of the other And first of all I am of opinion that the Earl of Huntington and such other pretenders as are of the House of York alone before the Conjunction of both Houses by King Henry VII may be named to be of the House of Clarence and so for distinction sake I do name them not to confound them with the Houses of Scotland and Suffolk which are term●d also by the Lancastrians to be of the House of York alone for that they deny them to be of the true House of Lancaster but principally I do name them to be of the House of Clarence for that indeed all their Claim and Title to the Crown doth des●end from George Duke of Clarence as before in the third Chapter and elsewhere hath been declared which Duke George being Brother to King Edward IV. and put to death by his order left Issue Edward Earl of Warwick and of Salisbury who was put to death by King Henry VII in his youth and Margaret Countess of Salisbury which Margaret had Issue by Sir Richard Poole Henry Poole Lord Montague afterwards beheaded and he again Katharine married to Sir Francis Hastings Earl of Huntington by whom she had Sir Henry Hastings now Earl of Huntington Sir George Hastings his Brother yet living and others So as the Earl of Huntington with his said Brethren are in the fourth degree from the said George Duke of Clarence to wit his Nephews twice removed The said Margaret Countess of Salisbury had a younger Son also named Sir Geffrey Poole who had Issue another Geffrey and this Geffrey hath two Sons alive at this day in Italy named Arthur and Geffrey who are in the same degree of distance with the said Earl of Huntington saving that some alledge for them that they do descend all by male-kind from Margaret and the Earl pretendeth by a Woman whereof we shall speak afterwards Hereby then it is made manifest how the Earl of Huntington cometh to pretend to the Crown of England by the House of York only which is no other indeed but by the debarring and disabling of all other former Pretenders not only of Portugal and of Britany as strangers but also of the Houses of Scotland and Suffolk that hold likewise of the House of York and for the Reasons and Arguments which in the former two Chapters I have set down in particular against every one of them and shall hereafter also again those that remain which Arguments and Objections or any of them if they should not be found sufficient to exclude the said other Houses then is the Claim of this House of Huntington thereby made void for that it is as we see by the younger Child of the House of York that is to say by the second Brother So as if either the pretence of Lancaster in general be better than that of Yo●k or if in the House of York it self any of the forenamed Pretenders descended from King Edward IV. as of the elder Brother may hold or take place then holdeth not this title of Clarence for that as I have said it coming from the younger Brother must needs be grounded only or principally upon the barring and excluding of the rest that joyntly do pretend Of which Bars and Exclusions laid by this House of Clarence against the rest for that I have spoken sufficiently in the last two Chapters going before for so much as toucheth the two Houses of Scotland and Suffolk and shall do afterwards about the other two of Britany and Portugal I mean in this place to omit to say any more therein and only to consider what the other Competitors do alledge against this House of Clarence and especially against the pretence of the Earl of Huntington as chief Titler thereof for to the excluding of him do concur not only those other of opposite Houses but also the Pooles of his own House as now we shall see First th●n the contrary Houses do alledge generally against all this House of Clarence that seeing their Claim is founded only upon the Right of the Daughter of George Duke of Clarence second Brother to King Edward IV. evident it is that so long as any lawful Issue remaineth of any elder Daughter of the said King Edward the elder Brother as they say much doth and cannot be denied no Claim or Pretence of the younger Brothers Daughter can be admitted And so by standing upon this and answering to the Objections alledged before against the elder Houses they
Darly her Husband which by many was laid against her And the second did handle her Title to the Crown of England and the third did answer the Book of John Knox the Scot entituled Against the Monstrous Government of Women Of all which three Points for that the second that concerneth the Title is that which properly appertaineth to our purpose and for that the same is handled again and more largely in the second Book set out not long after by John Lesley Lord Bishop of Ross in Scotland who at that time was Embassadour for the said Queen of Scots in England and handled the same matter more abundantly which M. Morgan had done before him I shall say no more of this Book of M. Morgan but shall pass over to that of the Bishop which in this Point of Succession containeth also whatsoever the other hath so as by declaring the Contents of the one we shall come to see what is the other The Intent then of this Book of the Bishop of Ross is to refute the other book of Hales and Bacon and that especially in the two Points before mentioned which they alledged for their Principles to wit about Foreign Birth and King Henry's Testament And against the first of these two Points the Bishop alledgeth many Proofs that there is no such Maxim in the common Laws of England to disinherit a Prince born out of the Land from his or her Right of Succession that they have by Blood And this first for that the Statute made for barring of Aliens to inherit in England which was in the 25. Year of the Reign of King Edward III. is only to be understood of particular mens inheritance and no ways to be extended to the Succession of the Crown as by comparison of many other like Cases is declared And secondly for that there is express exception in the same Statute of the Kings Children and Off-spring And thirdly for that the practice hath always been contrary both before and after the Conquest to wit that divers Princes born out of the Realm have succeeded The other Principle also concerning King Henry's Testament the Bishop impugneth first by divers Reasons and Incongruities whereby it may be presumed that King Henry never made any such Testament and if he did yet could it not hold in Law And secondly also by Witness of the Lord Paget that was of the Privy Council in those days and of Sir Edward Montague Lord Chief Justice and of one William Clark that set the Kings Stamp to the Writing all which avowed before the Council and Parliament in Queen Maries time that the said Testament was signed after the King was past sense and memory And finally the said Bishop concludeth that the Line of Scotland is the next every way both in respect of the House of Lancaster and also of York for that they are next Heirs to King Henry VIII who by his Father was Heir to the House of York But after these three Books was written a fourth by one Robert Highinton Secretary in time past to the Earl of Northumberland a man well read in Stories and especially of our Countrey who is said to be dead some years past in Paris This man impugneth all the three former Books in divers principal Points and draweth the Crown from both their Pretenders I mean as well-from the House of Scotland as from that of Suffolk and first against the Book of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon written as hath been said in favour of the House of Suffolk Highington holdeth with the Bishop and Morgan that these two Principles laid by the other of Foreign Birth and of King Henry's Testament against the Scotish Line are of no Validity as neither their reasons for legitimating of the Earl of Hartfords Children which afterwards shall be handled And secondly he is against both Morgan and the Bishop of Ross also in divers important Points and in the very Principal of all for that this man I mean Highinton maketh the King of Spain to be the next and most rightful Pretender by the House of Lancaster for proof whereof he holdeth first that King Henry VII had no Title indeed to the Crown by Lancaster but only by the House of York that is to say by his Marriage of Queen Elizabeth elder Daughter to King Edward IV For that albeit himself were descended by his Mother from John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster yet this was but by his Third Wife Catharin Swinford and that the true Heirs of Blanch his first Wife Dutchess and Heir of Lancaster to whom saith he appertained only the Succession after the death of King Henry the VI. and his Son with whom ended the Line Male of that House remained only in Portugal by the Marriage of Lady Philip Daughter of the foresaid Blanch to King John the I. of Portugal and that for as much as King Philip of Spain saith this man hath now succeeded to all the Right of the Kings of Portugal to him appertaineth also the onely Right of Succession of the House of Lancaster and that all the other Descendents of King Henry VII are to pretend only by the Title of York I mean as well the Line of Scotland as also of Suffolk and Huntington for that in the House of Lancaster King Philip is evidently before them all Thus holdeth Highington alledging divers Stories Arguments and Probabilities for the same and then adjoineth two other Propositions which do import most of all to wit that the Title of the House of Lancaster was far better than that of York not for that Edmond Crookback first Founder of the House of Lancaster who was Son to King Henry the III. and Brother to King Edward the I. was eldest son to the said Edward injuriously put back for his deformity in Body as both the said Bishop of Ross and George Lylly do falsly hold and this man refuteth by many good Arguments but for that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster being the eldest Son that King Edward the III. had alive when he dyed should in Right have succeeded in the Crown as this man holdeth and should have been preferred before Richard the II. that was the black Princes Son who was a degree further off from King Edward the III. his Grandfather than was John of Gaunt to whom King Edward was Father and by this occasion this man cometh to discuss at large the opinions of the Lawyers whether the Uncle or the Nephew should be preferred in the Succession of a Crown to wit whether the younger Brother or the elder Brothers son if his Father be dead without being seased of the same which is a Point that in the Civil Law hath great Disputation and many great Authors on each side as this man sheweth and the matter also wanteth not examples on both parts in the Succession of divers English Kings as our Friend the Civil Lawyer did signify also in his discourse and we may chance to have occasion
the great and Royal Houses of Burgundy and Orleans whereby all three Commonwealths I mean England Britany and France were like to have come to destruction and utter desolation And for that it may serve much to our purpose hereafter to understand well this controversie of Britany I think it not amiss in few words to declare the same in this place Thus then it happened The foresaid Arthur the second of that name Duke of Britanie and Son of Lady Beatrix that was Daughter as hath been said to King Henry the III. of England had two Wives the first named Beatrix as his Mother was and by this he had two Sons John that succeeded him in the State by the name of Duke John the III. and Guye that dying before his elder Brother left a Daughter and Heir named Joan and surnamed the lame for that she halted who was married to the Earl of Bloys that was Nephew to Phillip of Valois King of France for that he was born of his Sister But besides the two Children the said Duke Arthur had by his second Wife named Joland Countess and Heir of the Earldom of Monford another Son called John Breno who in the right of his Mother was Earl of Monford And afterward when Duke John the III. came to die without Issue the question was who should succeed him in his Dukedom the Uncle or the Neece that is to say his third Brother John Breno by half bloud or else his Neece Joan the lame that was Daughter and Heir to his second Brother Guye of whole bloud that is by Father and Mother which Lady Joan was married to the Earl of Bloys as hath been said And first this matter was handled in the Parliament of Paris the King himself sitting in Judgment with all his Peers the 30 day of September 1341 and adjudged it to the Earl of Bloys both for that his Wife was Heir to the elder Brother as also for that Duke John by his Testiment and consent of the States had appointed her to be his Heir but yet King Edward the III. and States of England did Judge it otherwise and preferred John Monford not knowing that the very case was to fall out very soon after in England I mean they Judged the State to John Breno Earl of Monford younger Brother to Guy and they assisted him and his Son after him with all their Forces for the gaining and holding of that State And albeit at the beginning it seemed that matters went against Monford for that himself was taken prisoner in Nantes and carried captive to Paris where he died in prison yet his Son John by the assistance of the English Armies got the Dukedome afterward and slew the Earl of Bloys and was peaceably Duke of Britanie by the name of John the IV. and his posterity hath endured until this day as briefly here I will declare This Duke John the IV. of the House of Monford had Issue John the V. and he Francis the first who dying without Issue left the Dukedom to Peter his Brother and Peter having no Children neither he left it to his Uncle Arthur the III Brother to his Father John the V. and this Arthur was Earl of Richmond in England as some of his ancestors had been before him by gifts of the Kings of England This Arthur dying without Issue left the Dukedom unto his Nephew to wit his Brothers Son Francis the II. who was the last male Child of that race and was he that had once determined to have delivered Henry Earl of Richmond unto his enemy King Edward the IV. and after him to King Richard the III. but that Henry's good fortune reserved him to come to be King of England This Duke Francis had a Daughter and Heir named Anna married first to Charles the VIII King of France and after his death without Issue to his Successor Lewis the XII by whom she had a Daughter named Claudia that was Heir to Britanie though not to the Crown of France by reason of the Law Salique that holdeth against women in the Kingdom of France but not in Britany and to the end this Dukdome should not be disunited again from the said Crown of France this Daughter Claudia was married to Francis Duke of Angolome Heir apparent to the Crown of France by whom she had Issue Henry that was afterward King of France and was Father to the last King of that Country and to Isabel Mother of the Infanta of Spain and of her Sister the Dutchess of Savoy that now is by which also some do affirm that the said Princess or Infanta of Spain albeit she be barred from the Succession of France by their pretended Law Salique yet is her title manifest to the Dukdome of Britanie that came by a woman as we have shewed and thus much of the House of Britany and of the Princess of Spain how she is of the Bloud Royal of England from the time of William the Conqueror himself by his eldest Daughter as also by other Kings after him and now we shall return to prosecute the Issue of these two Sons of King Henry the III. to wit of Edward and Edmond which before we left I shewed you before how King Henry the III. had two Sons Edward the Prince that was King after his Father by the name of Edward the first and Edmond surnamed Crouchback by some Writers who was the first Earl and County Palatine of Lancaster and beginner of that House And albeit some Writers of our time have affirmed or at least wise much inclined to favour a certain old report that Edmond should be the Elder Brother to Edward and put back only for his deformity of his body whereof Polidor doth speak in the beginning of the Reign of King Henry the IV. and as well the Bishop of Ross as also George Lilly do seem to believe it yet evident it seemeth that it was but a fable as before I have noted and now again shall briefly prove it by these reasons following for that it importeth very much for deciding the controversie between the Houses of Lancaster and York The first reason then is for that all Ancient Historiographers of England and among them Mattheus Westmonasteriensis that lived at the same time do affirm the contrary and do make Edward to be elder then Edmond by six years and two days for that they appoint the Birth of Prince Edward to have been upon the 16. day of June in the year of Christ 1239 and the 24. of the Reign of his Father King Henry and the Birth of Lord Edmond to have followed upon the 18. day of the same month 6 years after to wit in the year of our Lord 1245 and they do name the Godfathers and Godmothers of them both together with the peculiar solemnities and feasts that were celebrated at their several Nativities so as it seemeth there can be no error in this matter The 2d
married to the King of Norway all which Issue and Line ended about the year 1290. David younger Brother to King William had Issue two daughters Margaret and Isabel Margaret was married to Alain Earl of Galloway and had Issue by him a daughter that married John Balliol Lord of Harcourt in Normandy who had Issue by her this John Balliol Founder of Balliol Colledge in Oxford that now pretended to the Crown as descended from the eldest daughter of David in the third descent Isabel the second daughter of David was married to Robert Bruse Earl of Cleveland in England who had Issue by her this Robert Bruse Earl of Carick the other competitor Now then the question between these two competitors was which of them should Succeed either John Balliol that was Nephew to the elder daughter or Robert Bruse that was Son to the younger daughter and so one degree more near to the Stock or Stem then the other And albeit King Edward the first of England whose power was dreadful at that day in Scotland having the matter referred to his arbitrement gave sentence for John Balliol and Robert Bruse obeyed for the time in respect partly of fear and partly of his Oath that he had made to stand to that Judgment yet was that sentence held to be unjust in Scotland and so was the Crown restor'd afterward to Robert Bruse his Son and his posterity doth hold it unto this day In England also it self they alledge the examples of K. Henry the first preferred before his Nephew William Son and Heir to his elder Brother Robert as also the example of K. John preferred before his Nephew Arthur Duke of Britany for that King Henry the second had four Sons Henry Richard Geffery and John Henry died before his Father without Issue Richard Reigned after him and died also without Issue Geffery also died before his Father but left a Son named Arthur Duke of Britany by right of his Mother But after the death of King Richard the question was who should Succeed to wit either Arthur the Nephew or John the Uncle but the matter in England was soon desided for that John the Uncle was preferred before the Nephew Arthur by reason he was more near to his Brother dead by a degree then was Arthur And albeit the King of France and some other Princes abroad opposed themselves for stomack against this Succession of King John yet say these favourers of the House of Lancaster that the English inclined still to acknowledge and admit his right before his Nephew and so they proclaimed this King John for King of England while he was yet in Normandy I mean Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury Eleanor the Queen this Mother Geffery Fitz-peter chief Judge of England who knew also what law meant therein and others the Nobles and Barons of the Realm without making any doubt or scruple of his title to the Succession And whereas those of the House of York do alledge that King Richard in his life time when he was to go to the holy Land caused his Nephew Arthur to be declared Heir apparent to the Crown and thereby did shew that his title was the better they of Lancaster do answer first that this declaration of King Richard was not made by act of Parliament of England for that King Richard was in Normandy when he made this declaration as plainly appeareth both by Polidor and Hollingshed Secondly that this declaration was made the sooner by King Richard at that time thereby to repress and keep down the ambitious humor of his Brother John whom he feared least in his absence if he had been declared for Heir apparent might invade the Crown as indeed without that he was like to have done as may appear by that which happened in his said Brothers absence Thirdly they shew that this declaration of King Richard was never admitted in England neither would Duke John suffer it to be admitted but rather caused the Bishop of Ely that was left Governour by King Richard with consent of the Nobility to renounce the said declaration of King Richard in favour of Arthur and to take a contrary Oath to admit the said John if King Richard his Brother should die without Issue and the like Oath did the said Bishop of Ely together with the Archbishop of Roan that was left in equal Authority with him exact and take of the Citizens of London when they gave them their Priviledges and Liberties of Commonalty as Hollingshed recordeth And lastly the said Hollinshed writeth how that King Richard being now come home again from the War of Jerusalem and void of that jealousie of his Brother which before I have mentioned he made his last Will and Testament and ordained in the same that his Brother John should be his successor and caused all the Nobles there present to swear Fealty unto him as to his next in bloud for which cause Thomas Walsingham in his story writeth these words Johannis filius junior Henrici 2. Anglorum regis Alienorae Ducissae Aquitaniae non modo jure propinquitatis sed etiam testamento fratris sui Richardi designatus est successo post mortem ipsius which is John younger Son of Henry the second King of England and of Eleanor Dutchess of Aquitain was declared successor of the Crown not only by Law and right of nearness of bloud but also by the Will and Testament of Richard his Brother Thus much this ancient Chronicler speaketh in the testifying of King John's Title By all which examples that fell out almost within one age in divers Nations over the World letting pass many others which the Civilian touched in his discourse before for that they are of more ancient times these favourers of the House of Lancaster do infer that the right of the Uncle before the Nephew was no new or strange matter in those days of King Edward the third and that if we will deny the same now we must call in question the succession and right of all the Kingdoms and States before-mentioned of Naples Sicily Spain Britany Flanders Scotland and England whose Kings and Princes do evidently hold their Crowns at this day by that very Title as hath been shewed Moreover they say that touching Law in this point albeit the most famous Civil Lawyers of the World be somewhat divided in the same matter some of them favouring the Uncle and some other the Nephew and that for different reasons as Baldus Oldratus Panormitanus and divers others alledged by Gulielm●● Benedictus in his Repetitions in favour of the Nephew against the Uncle And on the other side for the Uncle before the Nephew Bartolus Alexander Decius Altiatus Cujatius and many other their followers are recounted in the same place by the same man yet in the end Baldus that is held for head of the contrary side for the Nephew after all reasons weighed to and fro he cometh to conclude
the Reasons that were on both Parties for this matter and so much the more for that it seemed to Fall very fit to the purpose of these pretences of Foreign Princes for which cause they entreated him very instantly that before he passed any further or ended his whole discourse of the Titles which hitherto they said had greatly contented them he would stay himself a little upon this matter which though for a time he made great difficulty to do yet in the end being so importuned by them he promised that at their Meeting the next day he would satisfie their desire and so for that time they departed very well contented but yet as they said with their Heads full of Titles and Titlers to the Crown CHAP. IX Whether it be better to be under a Foreign or Home born Prince and whether under a great and mighty Monarch or under a little Prince or King THe Company being gathered together the next day and shewing much desire to hear the point discussed about Foreign Government whereof mention had been made the day before the Lawyer began to say That for so much as they would needs have him to enter into that matter which of it self was full of prejudice in most mens ears and minds for that no Nation commonly could abide to hear of being under strange Governours and Governments he meant to acquit himself in this their Request as he had done in other matters before which was to lay down only the Opinions and Reasons of other men that had disputed this Affair on both sides before him and of his own to affirm or deny nothing And first of all against the Dominions of Strangers and Foreigners he said that he might discourse without end and fill up whole Books and Volumes with the Reasons and Arguments or at least wise with the dislikes and aversions that all men commonly had to be under strangers or to have any Aliens to bear Rule or Charge over them be they of what Condition State or Degree soever and in this he said that as well Philosophers Lawmakers wise and good men as others do agree commonly for that we see both by their Words Writings and Facts that they abhorr to subject themselves to strange Governments so as in all the eight Books of Aristotles's Politicks you shall still see that in all the different Forms of Commonwealths that he setteth down he presupposeth ever that the Government shall be by People of the self same Nation and the same thing do presume in like manner all those Law-makers that he there mentioneth to wit Minois Solon Lycurgus Numa Pompilius and the rest and he that shall read the Famous Invectives of Demosthenes against the pretentions of King Philip of Macedonia that desired to incroach upon the Athenians and other States of Greece as also his Orations against Aeschinos his Adversary that was thought secretly to Favour the said Foreign Prince shall see what Hatred that noble Orator had against Foreign Government and he that shall read the Books of our time either of the Italians when they spake of their Subjection in times past to the Lombardes German or French Nations or to the Spaniards at this day or shall consider what the French do presently write and inveigh against the Power of the House of Guyse and Lorayne in France for that they take them to be Strangers shall easily see how deeply this aversion against Strangers is rooted in their Hearts and this for Testimony of words But now if we will consider the Facts that have ensued about this matter and how much Blood hath been ●hed and what desperate Attempts have been taken in hand by divers Nations for avoiding their subjection to strangers or for delivering themselves from the same again if once they have faln into it you shall behold more plainly the very Impression of Nature her self in this Affair for of divers barbarous Nations Realms and Cities we read in Histories we read that they rather chose to slay and murder themselves than to be under the Dominion of Stranger others have adventured strange Attempts and Bloody Stratagems as the Sicilians who in one day and at the self same hour at the time of Evening S●ng slew all the French-men that were within the Island whom yet themselves had called and invited thither not long before And the like is recorded in our English Histories of killing the Danes by English men at one time in most ruful manner And the like was oftentimes thought on also by the English against the Normans when they Oppressed us and by the French against the English whiles we had Dominion in Fran●e though neither the one nor the other of these latter designments could be effectuated for want of Forces and Commodity by reason of the watchfulness of the contrary part But yet to speak only of France the Rage and Fury of the French was generally so great and implacable against the English that Governed there in the Reign of King Henry the VI. as both Polydor and other Histories do note ●t what time partly by the dissensions of the Houses of York and Lancaster in England and partly by the valour of their own new King Charles the VII they had hope to be rid of the English Dominion as no Perswasion or Reason no Fear of Punishment no Force of Arms no Promise or Threat no Danger no Pity no Religion no Respect of God nor Man could repress or stay them from rising and revolting every where against the English Government and Governours murthering those of the English Nation in all parts and corners wheresoever they found them without remorse or compassion until they were utterly delivered of their Dominion So as this matter is taught us say these men even by Nature her self that Strangers Government is not to be admitted and moreover the reasons before alledged against the King of Scotlands pretence together with the example and judgments of the Realms of Spain and Portugal who resolved rather to alter the true Order and Course of their Succession than to admit Strangers over them do plainly Confirm the same And last of all say these men the Authority of Holy Scripture is evident in this behalf for that when● God in Deuteronomy did fortel by Moses that the Jews in time would come to change their Government and to desire a King as other Nations round about them had he added yet this express Condition that he should be only of their own Nation for he saith Constitues eum quem Deus tuus el●gerit de numero fratrum tuorum non poteris altertus gentis hominem Regem facere qui non sit frater tuus that is Thou shalt make a King at that time such a one as thy Lord God shall chuse for that dignity out of the number of thy Brethren but thou mayst not make a King of any other Nation but of thy own Brethren