Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	case_n	devise_n	devise_v	3,680	5	10.4285	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A05354	A treatise tovvching the right, title, and interest of the most excellent Princess Marie, Queene of Scotland, and of the most noble king Iames, her Graces sonne, to the succession of the croune of England VVherein is conteined asvvell a genealogie of the competitors pretending title to the same croune: as a resolution of their obiections. Compiled and published before in latin, and after in Englishe, by the right reuerend father in God, Iohn Lesley, Byshop of Rosse. VVith an exhortation to the English and Scottish nations, for vniting of them selues in a true league of amitie.; Defence of the honour of the right highe, mightye and noble Princesse Marie Quene of Scotlande and dowager of France. Selections	Leslie, John, 1527-1596.	1584 (1584)	STC 15507; ESTC S108494	94,307	147

statute are omitted the same is vitious and voide in the lawe So likewise the statute made in Anno 32. 32. H. 8. 6. 1. H. 8. geueth authoritie to dispose landes and Testamentes by last VVil and Testement in writing If a man do deuise his lande by his last VVil and Testament nuncupatiue without writing this deuise is insufficiēt in law not warrāted by the said statute VVe leaue of a number of like cases that we might multiplie in the prooff of this matter wherein we haue taried the longer bycause the Aduersaries make so great a countenance therevpon and bycause all vnder one it may serue for the answere also touching the Kinges royal assente to be geuen to Parlamentes by his Letters Patentes signed with his hande which is nothing else but a declaration affirmance of the common lawe no newe authoritie geuen to him to do that he could not doo before or any forme prescribed to bind him vnto Bisides that in this case there is no feare in the worlde of forging and counterfeyting the Kinges hande whereas in the Testamētarie cause it is farre otherwise as the worlde knoweth and dayly experience teacheth And so withall do we conclude that by reason this surmised will was not signed with the Kinges hand it can not any way hurt or hinder the iuste right and clame of the Queene of Scotland to the succession of the Croune of England Now supposing that neither the L. Paget nor Sir Edward Montague and VVilliam Clarke had testified or plublished any thing to the infringing ouerthrowing of the Aduersaries assertiō touching the signing of the said will yet is not therby the Queene of Scotlandes title altogether hindred For she yet hath her iust and lawful defence for the oppugning of the said assertion as well against the persones and sayings of the witnesses if any shall come foorth as otherwise shee may iustly require the said wil to be brought forth to light and especially the signing of the same with the Kings hande to be duely and consideratly pondered weyghed and conferred She hath her iust defence and exeptions and must haue And it were against al lawes and the lawe of nature it selfe to spoile her of the same And all good reason geueth that the said original will standing vpon the triall of the Kings hande be exhibited that it may be compared with his other certaine and well knowen hand writing And that other things may be done that are requisite in this behalfe But yet all this notwithstanding let vs nowe imagine suppose that the King him selfe whose hart and hand were doubtlesse farre from any such doings lette vs yet I say admitte that he had signed the said will with his owne hande Yet for all that the Aduersaries perchance shal not finde no not in this case that the Queenes iuste Title right and interest doth any thing fayle or quayle The supposed vvill can not preiudice the Quene of Scotlād though it had ben signed vvi h the Kinges ovv e hand Or rather lette vs without any perchance say the iustice and equitie of her cause and the inuincible force of trueth to be suche that neither the Stampe nor the Kinges owne hande can beare and beate it downe VVhiche thing we speake not without good probable and weightie reasons Neither do we at this time minde to debate discourse what power and autoritie and how farre the Parlament hath to doe in this and like cases VVhiche perchance some other would here do VVe will only intermedle with other thinges that reache not so farre nor so high and seeme in this our present question worthy and necessarie to be considered And first before we enter into other matters we aske this reasonable and necessarie question whether these general words wherby this large ample authoritie is cōueied to king Henry must be as generally and as amply taken or be restrained by some manner of limitation and restriction agreable to such mind and purpose of the Parlament as must of very necessitie or great likelihod be construed to be the very mind and purpose of the said Parlament Ye wil say perchance that the power and authoritie of assignation must be taken generally and absolutely without exception sauing for the outward signing of the wil. Trueth it is there is nothing els expressed but yet was there some thinges els principally intended and yet for all that needed not to be specified The outward manner was so specially and precisely appointed and specified to auoyde suspitious dealing to auoide corruption and forgery And yet was the will good and effectual without the Kinges hande Ther must needes be some qualification and restraint of the general vvordes of the statute Yea and the assignation to had ben good had not that restrainte of the Kinges hande bene added by the Parlament But for the qualification of the person to be limited and assigned and so for the necessarie restriction and limitation of the wordes were they neuer so large ample there is though nothing were spoken thereof an ordinary helpe remedie Otherwise if the Realme had ben set ouer to a furious or a madde man or to an idiote or to some foraine and Mahometical Prince and to such a one as stories testifie that King Iohn would haue submitted him selfe his Realme or to any other notorious incapable or vnhable person Matthaeus Parisieusis in Iohan. the generalitie of the wordes seeme to beare it but the good minde and purpose of the Parlament and mans reason doe in no wise beare it If ye graunt that these wordes must nedes haue some good and honest construction and interpretation as reason doth force you to graunt it yet will I aske further whether as the King cutte of in this pretensed will the whole noble race of the eldest sister and the first issue of the yongest sister so if he had cutte of also al the ofspringes as wel of the said yongest sister as of the remnante of the royal blood placed some being not of the said blood perchāce otherwise vnable this assignation had bene good and vailable in lawe as conformable to reason and to the mind and purpose of the Parlamēt It were surely to great an absurdity to graunt it There must be therefore in this matter some reasonable moderation and interpretation as wel touching the persones comprehended within this assignation their qualities for the persons also hauing right yet excluded as for the manner of the doing of the act signing the wil. For the king as King could not dispose the Croune by his will was in this behalfe but an Arbiter and Cōmissioner VVherefore his doinges must be directed and ruled by the lawe according to the good minde and meaning of those that gaue the authoritie And what their minde was it will appeare well enough euen in the statute it selfe It was for the auoiding of all ambiguities doubtes and diuisions

cōmon lawe of that realme that hath bene taken by any iust cōstruction to extende vnto or bind the King or his Croune I will not denie but that to declare set forth the prerogatiue and Iurisdiction of the King they may shewe many rules of the lawe but to binde hym as I haue sayde they can shewe none The obiections of the aduersaries touching Aliens borne are clearlie auoided OVR aduersaries in a booke gyuen out by them touching this succession doe alleige for a Maxime in lawe most manifest that who so euer is borne out of England and of father and mother not being vnder obediēce of the King of England can not be capable to inherite any thing in England VVhiche rule being generall without any wordes of exception they also say must nedes extende vnto the Croune VVhat they meane by lawe I knowe not But if they meane as I thinke they do the common lawe of England I answere there is no suche Maxime in the common lawe of the Realme of Englande as hereafter I shall manifestly proue But if it were for argumentes sake admitted for this time that it be a Maxime or general rule of the common lawe of England yet to saye that it is so general as that no exception can be taken against the same rule they shewe them selues either ignorant 25. E. 3. or els very carelesse of their credite For it doth plainely appeare by the Statute of 25. E. 3. being a declaration of that rule of the lawe which I suppose they meane in terminge it a Maxime that this rule extendeth not vnto the Kinges children VVhereby it moste euindently appeareth that it extendeth not generally to all And if it extende not to binde the Kinges children in respect of any inheritance descended vnto them from any of their Auncestours it is an Argument á for●iori that it doth not extende to binde the king or his Croune And for a full short answere to their Authorities sett foorth in their marginall Notes as 5. Edvvard 3. tt Ayl● 1● Edvva 3. tt Bref 31. Edvva 3. tt Cosen 42 Ed. 3 fol. 2 22 Henric. 6 fol. 42. 11. Henric. 4. 23. 24. Litleton ca. vile●age it may plainly appeare vnto all that will reade and peruse those Bookes that there is none of them all that doth so muche as with a peece of a word or by any colour or shadow seeme to intende that the title of the Croune is bounde by this their supposed generall rule or Maxime For euerie one of the said Cases argued and noted in the said Booke are onely concerning the dishabilitie of an Alien borne and not Denizon to demaunde any landes by the lawes of the Realme by suite and action onely as a subiect vnder the King The aduersaries case perteineth to subiectes onely and nothing touching any dishabilitie to be laied to the King hymselfe or to his subiectes Is there any cōtrouersie about the title of the Croune by reason of any suche dishabilitie touched in any of these Bookes No verely not one woord I dare boldely say As it may most manifestly appeare to them that will reade and pervse those bookes And yet the aduersaries are not ashamed to note them as sufficient authorities for the maintenance of their euill purpose and intent But as they would seeme to vnderstand that their rule of dishabilitie is a generall Maxime of the lawe so me thinketh they should not be ignorant that it is also as general No Maxime of the lavve bindeth the Croune vnles the Croune specially be named yea a more general rule Maxime of the lawe that no Maxime or rule of the lawe can extende to binde the king or the Croune vnlesse the same be specially mentioned therein as may appeare by diuerse principles and rules of the lawe which be as general as is their sayd supposed Maxime and yet neither the king nor the Croune is by any of them bound As for example it is very plaine 1. Of Tenant by the curtesy that the rule of Tenante by the Curtesie is general without any exception at all And yet the same bindeth not the Croune neither doth extende to geue any benefite to him that shall Marie the Queene of England As it was plainely agreed by all the lawiers of that Realme when king Philip was maried vnto Queene Marie although for the more suertie and plaine declaration of the intentes of King Philip and Queene Marie and of all the states of that Realme it was enacted 2. Nor that the landes shal be diuided among the daughters that king Philip should not clame any title to be Tenaunt by the Curtesie It is also a general rule that if a man dye seysed of any landes in Fee simple without yssue male hauing diuerse daughters the lande shal be equally diuided among the daughters VVhich rule the learned men in the lawes of that Realme agreed in the lyfe of the late noble Prince Edwarde and also euery reasonable man knoweth by vsage to take no place in the succession of the Croune For there the eldest enioyeth all 3. Nor the vvife shall haue the third part as though she were issue male Likewise it is a general rule that the wife after the decease of her husband shal be endowed haue the third parte of the best possessions of her husband And yet it is verie clere 5. E. 3. Tit. praeroga 21. E. 3. 9. 28. H. 6. that a Queene shall not haue the thirde parte of the landes belonging to the Croune as appeareth in 5. E. 3. Tit. praerogat 21. E. 3. 9. 28. H. 6. and diuers other bookes Bysides this the rule of Possessio fratris 4. Nor the rule of Possessio fratris c. being generall neither hath bene or can be stretched to the inheritance of the Croune For the brother of the half blood shall succede and not the sister of the whole blood as may appeare by Iustice Moile and may be proued by King Etheldred brother and successor to king Edward the Martyr and by kyng Edward the Confessor brother to king Edmunde and by diuers other who succeded in the Croune of England being but of the halfe blood As was also the late Queene Marie and is at this presente her sister VVho both in all recordes of the lawe wherein their seuerall rightes and titles to the Croune are pleaded as by daily experience in the Exchequer in all other Courtes is manifest doe make their conueiance as heires in blood the one to the other whiche if they were cōmon or priuate persons they could not be allowed in lawe they as is well knowen being of the halfe blood one to the other that is to wit begotten of one father 5. Nor that the executour shall haue the goods and Chattles of the testatour 7. H. 4. fol. 42. but borne of sundrie mothers It is also a generall rule in the lawe that the executour shall haue the goodes and

Chattles of the testatour not the heyre And yet is it other wise in the case of the Croune For there the successour shall haue them and not the executour as appeareth in 7. H. 4. by Gascoine It is likewise a general rule that a man attainted of felony or treason his heire through the corruption of blood without pardon and restitution of blood is vnable to take any landes by discente 6. VVhich rule although it be generall yet it extendeth not to the descente or succession of the Croune Nor that a traitour is vnable to take lādes by discēte and vvithout pardō although the same Attainder were by acte of Parlamente as may appeare by the Attainder of Ricarde Duke of Yorke and king Edward his son and also of king Henry the seuenth who were attainted by acte of Parlament and neuer restored and yet no dishabilitie thereby vnto any of them to receaue the Croune by lawfull succession But to this the aduersaries wold seeme to answere in their said booke sayeing that Henry the seuenth not with standing his attainder came to the Croune as caste vpon him by the order of the lawe for so much as when the Croune was caste vpon him that dishabilitie ceassed VVherein they confesse directly that the Attainder is no dishabilitie at all to the succession of the Croune For although no dishabilitie can be alleaged in him that hath the Croune in possession yet if there were any dishabilitie in him before to receue and take the same by lawful successiō then must they say that he was not lawful King but an vsurpet And therfore in confessing Henry the seuenth to be a lawful king and that the Croune was lawfully caste vpon him they confesse directly thereby that before he was kinge in possession there was no dishabilitie in him to take the Croune by lawful succession his said Attainder not withstanding whiche is as muche as I would wish them to graunt But in conclusion vnderstanding them selues that this their reason can not mainteine their intent An aunsvvere to the aduersary making a difference betvvene attainder the birth out of the allegeance they goe about an other way to helpe them selues making a difference in the lawe betwene the case of Attainder the case of foraine birth out of the kinges allegeance sayeinge that in the case of the Attainder necessitie doth enforce the succession of the Croune vpon the partie attaynted For otherwise they say the Croune shall not descēde to any But vpon the birth out of the kinges allegeāce they say it is otherwise And for proofe thereof they put a case of I. S. being seased of landes and hauing issue A. and B. A. is attainted in the life of I. S. his father and after I. S. dieth A. liuing vnrestored Nowe the lande shal not descende either to A. or B. but shal goe to the Lorde of the Fee by way of eschete Otherwise it had bene they say if A. had bene borne beyond the sea I. S. breaking his allegeance to the king and after I. S. cometh agayne into the Realme and hath issue B. and dieth for now they say B. shall inherite his fathers Landes Yf the Croune had bene holden of any person to whome it might haue escheted as in theyr case of I. S. the lande did then peraduenture there had bene some affinitie betwene theyr said case and the case of the Croune But there is no suche matter Bysides that they muste consider that the king cometh to the Croune not onely by descent but also chiefly by succession as vnto a corporation And therefore they might easely haue sene a difference in theyr cases betwene the kinges Maiestie and I. S. a subiecte And also betwene landes holden of a Lorde aboue the Croune holden of no earthly Lorde but of God almighty onely But yet for arguments sake I woulde faine knowe where they finde their difference and what authoritie they can shew for the proof thereof They haue made no marginal note of any authoritie therefore vnlesse they also saye that they are Pythagoras I will not beleue theyr difference VVel I am assured that I can shew good outhoritie to the contrarie and that there is no difference in theyr cases Yf they peruse 22. H. 6 22. H. 6. fol. 43. there may they see the opinion of Iustice Newton that there is no difference in theyr cases but that in both theyr cases the lande shall eschete vnto the Lorde And Prisote being then of Counsaile with the party that clamed lands by a descent wher the eldest sonne was borne beyond the seas durst not abide in lawe vpon the title This authoritie is against theyr differēce this authoritie I am well asseured is better then any that they haue shewed to proue their difference But if we shall admit their difference to be according to the lawe yet their cases where vnto they applie their difference are nothing like as I haue said before Now then to procede on in the proofe of our purpose as it doth appeare that neither the King nor his Croune is bound by these generall rules whiche before I haue shewed so do I likewise say of all the residue of the general rules Maximes of the lawe being in a manner infinite The supposed Maxime of the aduersaries toucheth not Kinges borne beyond the sea as appeareth by King Stephen and King H. 2. But to retourne againe vnto their onely supposed Maxime whiche they make so general concerning the dishabilitie of persones borne beyond the seas it is very plaine that it was neuer taken to extende vnto the Croune of the Realme of Englande as it may appeare by king Stephen and by king Henry the second who were both straungers and Frenchemen borne out of the kinges allegeance and neither were they kinges children immediate nor their parentes of the allegeance and yet they haue bene alwaies accompted lawfull kinges of England nor their title was by any man at any time defaced or comptrolled for any suche consideration or exception of foraine birth The aduersaris obiection touching King H. 2. auoided And it is a worlde to see how the aduersaries would shifte their handes from the said king Henry the second They say he came not to the Croune by order of the lawe but by capitulation for asmuche as his mother by whome he conueied his Title was then liuing VVell admitte that he came to the Croune by capitulation during his mothers life yet this doth not proue that he was dishabled to receaue the Croune but rather proueth his abylitie And although I did also admit that he had not the Croune by order of the lawe during his mothers life yet after his mothers death no man hath hitherto doubted but that he was king by lawfull succession and not against the lawes and Customes of that Realme For so might they put a doubt in all the Kinges of that Realme that euer gouerned sithens VVhiche thing

farre hath Polidor Thees are woordes of great importance putte our matter clear out of doubt for here it appeareth that the case solemnlie in counceil by a wyse and prudent King with wise graue and learned Counseilours was debated and with great wisedome resolued concluded and to this some lawyers of that land gyue great authoritie credit Thus it is euidently declared who are the true heires of the Crounes of Englād Scotlād and that the sayd mariage of Iames the fowerth and the sayd Lady Margaret is to be accompted a most fortunate benefit to the whole Yland For if it be true as in dede it is that the mariage of the seuenth Kyng Henrie with the daughter and heir of King Edward the fowerth was to be estemed as a most happie cōmoditie to all England because it dyd cutt of and dissolue all those tumultes and seditions betwene the howses of Yorke and Lancaster which so many yeres had miserablie afflicted all that nation I pray you what reckening is to be made of the matrimonie betwene King Iames the fowerth of Scotlād the Ladye Margaret daughter to the King of England sithe nowe at last by the benefit of this mariage bothe England and Scotland may be quite reskewed and deliuered from those most mortall warres and intestine dissentions whiche for preheminence sake haue bene so long continewed and maintened A happie prince therfore to Englād was King Henry the seuenth for that by him allmightie God abolished all seditions and vnited the two howses of yorke and Lancastre But most fortunate most gratiouse shall the renowmed Quene Mary of Scotland be her most noble sonne king Iames also to the Englishe and Scottishe Nations yf by them two the same God shall bringe the said twoe seuerall kyngdomes to a perfect vnitie reduce the whole Yle of Britaine to his moste auncient estate of dignitie and deliuer it from all ciuill warres and Barbarous crueltie Embrace therfore ye Britaine 's of all mortall men most fortunat and take holde of this singular great benefit when the same by the grace of the euerliuing God shal be bestowed vpō yow and in the mean time euer yeeld ye to him most hūble most hartie thankes for that he of his infinite clemency and benignitie hath at last produced out of booth you bloodes a Prince by whose helpe your domesticall troubles and dissentions may be extinguished a place left for this diuine lawe of peace and amitie to be planted by the same law a soueraigne safetye and wellfare of all the people establyshed For the wellfare of the people consisteth 〈◊〉 in peace and concord But perpetuall peace and quyetnesse can not be among you except these two Realmes be combined and made all one For the force of vnitie is suche as the preseruation therof is the vtter moste ende that nature intendeth Herehence also groweth among men charitie loue frendshipp so farre that many mindes are become all as one first to remember that they must be truely menne in dede and then that they leade a good blessed lyfe whiche is the last ende and perfection of mankinde Sithe therfore the matter goeth so if you will folow God and the law of nature if you desire the safety and wellfare of your countrie yf you will liue well and fortunatlie in this world and at last enioie the perfect blesse of eternall felicitie you must enforce your selues with all labour industrie and diligence that this dispersed people may be called together vnder the regiment of one rightfull Prince and Catholique Religion of their auncestors This will please allmightie God and bring great tranquilitie peace quiet to your selues and to all the people of England Scotland and Yreland And that it maye so be lett vs all continuallie pray to almightie God the supreme gouernour ruler of the whole worlde Amen