and Chartres in France and the other two Polidor said dyed before they were Married and so their names were not Recorded These are the Children of King William the Conqueror among whom after his death there was much strife about the Succession For first his eldest Son Duke Robert who by order of Ancestrie by birth should have succeeded him in all his Estates was put back first from the Kingdom of England by his third Brother William Rufus upon a pretence of the Conquerors Will and Testament for particular affection that he had to this his said third Son William though as Stow Writeth almost all the Nobility of England were against William's entrance But in the end agreement was made between the two Brothers with the condition that if William should dye without Issue then that Robert should succeed him and to this accord both the Princes themselves and twelve principal Peers of each side were Sworn but yet after when William dyed without Issue this was not observed but Henry the fourth Son entred and deprived Robert not only of this his Succession to England but also of his Dukedom of Normandy that he had enjoyed peaceably before all the time of his Brother Rufus and moreover he took him Prisoner and so carried him into England and there kept him till his death which happened in the Castle of Cardif in the year 1134. And whereas this Duke Robert had a goodly Prince to this Son named William who was Duke of Normandy by his Father and Earl of Flanders in the right of his grand Mother that was the Conquerors Wife and Daughter of Baldwin Earl of Flanders as hath been said and was established in both these States by the help of Lewis the VI. surnamed Le Gros King of France and admitted to do homage to him for the said States his Uncle King Henry of England was so violent against him as first he drove him out of the state of Normandy and secondly he set up and maintained a Competitor or two against him in Flanders by whom finally he was slaine in the year of Christ 1128. before the Town of Alost by an Arrow after he had gotten the upper hand in the Field and so ended the race of the first Son of King William the Conquerour to wit oâ— Duke Robert which Robert lived after the Death of his said Son and Heir Duke William Six years in Prison in the Castle of Cardiff and pined away with sorrow and misery as both the French and English Histories do agree The second Son of the Conqueror named Richard dyed as before hath been said in his Fathers time and left no Issue at all as did neither the third Son William Rufus though he Reigned 13. years after his Father the Conqueror in which time he established the Succession of the Crown by consent of the States of England to his elder Brother Duke Roberts issue as hath been said though afterwards it was not observed This King Rufus came to the Crown principally by the help and favour of Lanfrancus Archbishop of Canterbury who greatly repented himself afterward of the error which in that point he had committed upon hopes of his good Government which proved extream evil But this King William Rufus being slayn afterward by the Arrow of a Cross-bow in Newforrest as is well known and this at such time as the foresaid Duke Robert his elder Brother to whom the Crown by Succession apperteined was absent in the War of the Holy Land where according as most Authors do Write he was chosen King of Hierusalem but refused it upon hope of the Kingdom of England But he returning home found that his fourth Brother Henry partly by fair promises and partly by force had invaded the Crown in the year 1110. and so he Reigned 35. years and had Issue divers Sons and Daughters but all were either drounded in the Seas coming out of Normandy or else dyed otherwise before their Father except only Mathildis who was first Married to Henry the Emperour fifth of that name and after his death without Issue to Geffrey Plantagenet Duke of Anjow Touraine and Maine in France by whom she had Henry which Reigned after King Stephen by the name of Henry the II. And thus much of the Sons of William the Conqueror Of his two Daughters that lived to be Married and had Issue the elder named Constance was Married to Alayn Fergant Duke of Britain who was Son to Hoel Earl of Nants and was made Duke of Britain by William the Conquerors means in manner Following Duke Robert of Normanyd Father to the Conqueror when he went on Pilgrimage unto the Holy Land in which Voyage he dyed left for Governour of Normandy under the protection of King Henry the first of France Duke Alayne the first of Britain which Allayn had Issue Conan the first who being a stirring Prince of about 24. years old when Duke William began to treat of passing over into England he shewed himself not to favour much that enterprise which Duke William fearing caused him to be Poysoned with a pair of perfumed Gloves as the French stories do report and caused to be set up in his place and made Duke one Hoel Earl of Nantes who to gratifie William sent his Son Alaine surnamed Fergaâ—t with 5000. Souldiers to pass over into England with him and so he did and William afterward in recompence thereof gave him his eldest Daughter Constantia in Marriage with the Earldom oâ— Richmond by whom he had Issue Conan the second surnamed le Gross who had Issue a Son and a Daughter The Son was called Hoel as his Grand-Father was and the Daughters name was Bertha Married to Eudo Earl of Porhet in Normandy and for that this Duke Conan liked better his Daughter and his Son in-law her Husband then he did Hoel his own Son he disavowed him on his Death Bead and made his said Daughter his Heir who had by the said Eudo a Son named Conan surnamed the younger which was the third Duke of that name and this man had one only Daughter and Heir named Lady Constance who was Married to the third Son of King Henry the second named Geffrey and elder Brother to King John that after came to Reign and by this Lord Geffrey she had Issue Arthur the second Duke of Britain whom King John his Uncle put back from the Crown of England and caused to be put to death as after shall be shewed and he dying without Issue his Mother Constance Dutchess and Heir of Britain Married again with a Prince of her own House whom after we shall name in the prosecution of this Line and by him she had Issue that hath endured until this day the last whereof hitherto is the Lady Isabella infant of Spain and that other of Savoy her Sister whom by this means we see to have descended from King William the Conqueror by his eldest Daughter Lady
People and by help principally of Henry Newborow Earl of Warwick that dealt with the Nobility for him and Maurice Bishop of London with the Clergy for that Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury was in banishment Besides this also it did greatly help his cause that his elder Brother Robert to whom the Crown by right appertained was absent again this second time in the War of Jerusalem and so lost thereby his Kingdom as before Henry having no other Title in the World unto it but by Election and Admission of the People which yet he so defended afterwards against his said Brother Robert that came to claim it by the Sword and God did so prosper him therein as he toâ—k his said elder Brother Prisoner and so kept him for many Years until he dyed in Prison most pitifully But this King Henry dying left a Daughter behind him named Mawde or Mathilde which being married first to the Emperour Henry the V. he dyed without issue and then was she married again the second time to Geffry Plantagenet Earl of Anjow in France to whom she bare a Son named Henry his Grandfather caused to be declared for Heir Apparent to the Crown in his Days but yet after his decease for that Stephen Earl of Bollogne born of Adela Daughter to William the Conquerour was thought by the State of England to be more fit to Govern and to defend the Land for that he was at Mans age then was Prince Henry a Child of Maude his Mother he was admitted and Henry put back and this chiefly at the perswasion of Henry Bishop of Winchester Brother to the said Stephen as also by the Solicitation of the Abbot of Glassenbury and others who thought belike they might do the same with good Conscience for the good of the Realm though the event proved not so well for that it drew all England into Factions and Divisions for avoiding and ending whereof the States some Years after in a Parliament at Walâ—ingford made an agreement that Stephen should be Lawful King during his Life only and that Henry and his Off-spring should succeed him and that Prince William King Stephen's Son should be deprived of his Succession to the Crown and made only Earl of Norfolk thus did the State dispose of the Crown at that time which was in the Year of Christ 1153. To this Henry succeeded by Order his Eldest son then living named Richard and sirnamed Cordelyon for his Valor but after him again the Succession was broken For that John King Henry's youngest Son to wit younger Brother to Richard whom his Father the King had left so unprovided as in jest he was called by the French Jean sens terre as if you would say S r John Lacke Land This man I say was after the death of his Brother Admitted and Crowned by the States of England and Arthur Duke of Britain Son and Heir to Geffery that was elder brother to John was against the ordinary course of Succession excluded And albeit this Arthur did seek to remedy the matter by War yet it seemed that God did more defend this Election of the Commonwealth than the right Title of Arthur by Succession for that Arthur was overcome and taken by King John though he had the King of France on his side and he dyed pitifully in prison or rather as most Authors do hold he was put to death by King John his Uncles own hands in the Castle of Roan thereby to make his Title of Succession more clear which yet could not be for that as well Stow in his Chronicle as also Matthew of Westminster and others before him do write that Geffrey besides this Son left two Daughters also by the Lady Constance his Wife Countess and Heir of Britaine which by the Law of England should have succeeded before John but of this small account seemed to be made at that day Some years after when the Barons and States of England misliked utterly the Government and proceeding of this King John they rejected him again and chose Luys the Prince of France to be their King and did swear Fealty to him in London as before hath been said and they deprived also the young Prince Henry his Son that was at that time but eight years old but upon the death of his Father King John that shortly after insued they recalled again that sentence and admitted this Henry to the Crown by the name of King Henry the III. and disanulled the Oath and Allegiance made unto Luys Prince of France and so King Henry Reigned for the space of 53. years afterwards the longest Reign as I think that any before or after him hath had in England Moreover you may know that from this King Henry the third do take their first beginning the two branches of York and Lancaster which after fell to so great contention about the Crown Into which if we would enter we should see plainly as before hath been noted that the best of all their titles after the deposition of King Richard the second depended on this authority of the Commonwealth for that as the People were affected and the greater part prevailed so were their titles either allowed confirmed altered or disanulled by Parliaments and yet may not we well affirm but that either part when they were in possession and confirmed therein by these Parliaments were lawful Kings and that God concurred with them as with true Princes for Government of their People For if we should deny this point as before hath been noted great inconveniencis would follow and we should shake the States of most Princes in the World at this day as by examples which alreay I have alledged in part may appear And with this also I mean to conclude and end this discourse in like manner affirming that as on the one side propinquity of Bloud is a great preheminence towards the attaining of any Crown so yet doth it not ever bind the Commonwealth to yield thereunto if weightier Reasons should urge them to the contrary neither is the Commonwealth bound always to shut her Eyes and to admit at hap-hazard or of necessity every one that is next by Succession of Bloud as Belloy falsly and fondly affirmeth but rather she is bound to consider well and maturely the Person that is to enter Whether he be like to perform his duty and charge committed unto him or no for that otherwise to admit him that is an enemy or unfit is but to destroy the Common-wealth and him together This is my opinion and this seemeth to me to be conform to all Reason Law Religion Piety Wisdom and Policy and to the use and custom of all well governed Common-wealths in the World Neither do I mean hereby to prejudice any Princes pretence or Succession to any Crown or Dignity in the World but rather do hold that he ought to enjoy his Preheminence but yet so that he be not prejudiciae thereby to the whole
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
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 Gulielmâ—â— 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
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 Hâ—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 Câ—urtâ—â—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 extiâ—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 Nâ—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 wiâ—â— 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 Mâ—â—â—ray Duke of Norfolk de la Poole Duke of Suffolk the Earl of Saâ—isâ—uâ—y and the Earl of Warwiâ—k of all which the event was this John Moubray Duke of Nâ—rfolk the first considerate of the House of York died soon after the exaltation of Edward the fourth without Issue and so that name
accompt thereof both for that in it self they say it may easily be overthrown and proved to be of no validity as also for that if it were never so good yet might it for other considerations be rejected and made frustrate as our friend the Civil Lawyer hath largely and learnedly proved these days in our hearing To begin then to speak first of the King of Scots title by nearness of bloud these men do affirm that albeit there be not alledged any bastardy in his descent from King Henry the seventh his daughter as there is in her second marriage against the Lady Arabella yet are there other reasons enough to frustrate and overthrow this claim and pretention and first of all for that he is not say these men of the house of Lancaster by Lady Blanch the only true Heir thereof as before hath in part been shewed and shall be afterward more largely but only by Catharine Swinford whose Children being unlawfully begotten and but of the false bloud whether they may by that legitimation of Parliament that was given them be made inheritable unto the Crown before the lawful daughter of the whole bloud shall be discussed afterward in place convenient when we shall talk of the House of Portugal but in the mean space these men do presume that the King of Scots is but only of the House of York and then affirming farther that the tiâ—le of the House of Lancaster is better then that of York as by many arguments the favours of Lancaster have endeavoured to shew in the former Chapter they do infer that this is sufficient to make void all claim of the King of Scots that he may pretend by nearness of bloud especially seeing there want not at this day pretenders enough of the other House of Lancaster to claim their right so as the House of York shall not need to enter for fault of true Hâ—irs and this is the first argument which is made against the Scottish King and all the rest of his lineage by the favourers and followers of the said House of Lancaster A second argument is made against the said Kings succession not by them of Lancaster but rather by those of his own House of York which is founded upon his foreign birth by which they hold that he is excluded by the common laws of England from succession to the Crown for that the said laws do bar all strangers born out of the Realm to inherit within the Land and this is an argument handled very largely between the foresaid books of Mr Hales Mr. Morgan and my Lord of Ross and for that the same doth concern much the pretentions and claims of divers others that be strangers also by birth and yet do pretend to this succession as before hath been declared I shall repeat briefly in this place the sum of that which is alledged of both parties in this behalf First then to the general assertion that no stranger at all may inherit any thing by any means in England the said books of Mr. Morgan and my Lord Ross do answer that in that universal sense it is false for that it appeareth plainly by that which is set down by law in the seventh and ninth years of King Edward the fourth and in the eleventh and fourteenth of King Henry the fourth that a stranger may purchase Land in England as also that he may inherit by his Wife if he should marry an Inheritrix Secondly they say that the true maxim of rule against the Inheritance of strangers is grounded only upon a Statute made in the 25th year of King Edward the third and is to be restrained unto proper inheritances only to wit that no person born out of all the allegiance of the King of England whose Father and Mother were not of the same allegiance at the time of his birth for so are the words of the Statute shall be able to have or demand any heritage within the same allegiance as Heir to any person Thirdly they say that this axiom or general Rule cannot any way touch or be applied to the succession of the Crown first for that as hath been declared before no Axiom or Maxim of our Law can touch or be understood of matters concerning the Crown except express mention be made thereof and that the Crown is priviledged in many points that other private heritages be not And secondly for that the Crown cannot properly be called an Inheritance of Allegiance or within Allegiance as the words of the said Statute do stand for that it is not holden of any superior nor with allegiance but immediately from God And thirdly for that the Statute meaneth plainly of Inheritances by descent for otherwise as is said an Alien may hold Lands by purchase but the Crown is a thing incorporate and descendeth not according to the common course of other private inheritances but rather goeth by Succession as other Incorporations do in sign whereof no King can by Law avoid his Letters Patents by reason of his noneage as other common Heirs under age do but he is ever presumed to be of full age in respect of his Crown even as a Prior Parson Dean or other Head Incorporate is which can never be presumed to be within age and so as any such Head Incorporate though he be an Alien might inherit or demand lands in England for his Incorporation notwithstanding the former Statute so much more the Inheritor to the Crown Fourthly they say that in the very Statute it self there is express exception of Infantes du Roy by which words these men do hold to be understood all the Kings Off-spring or Blood Royal and they do fortifie their proof for that otherwise King Edward the third being then alive when this Statute against strangers was made and his Children also who had dispersed their bloud by marriages over all Christendom they would never have suffered such a Statute to pass to their own prejudice if the heritage of the Crown should fall unto them or any of theirs that should be born abroad And finally these men do shew how that King Stephen and King Henry the second born out of the Realm and of Parents that were not of the allegiance of England when they were born were yet admitted to the Crown without contradiction in respect of their forraign birth which argueth that by the common course of our old common Laws there was no such stop against Aliens and that if the Statute made in King Edward the third his days would have derogated or abridged this ancient liberty it would have made scpecial mention thereof which it doth not as hath been shewed and by reasons it seemeth that they have answered sufficienly to this objection of forraign birth both for the King of Scotland and all other pretenders that are foreign born so as by this impediment they may not in right be excluded from their succession So as now I will return to shew
lawful Wiâ—e which was Sister to the Lord Henry Fitz Allen Earl of Arundel which disorder was occasion of much unkindness and hatred between the said Marquess and Earl ever after But the power of the Marquess and favour with King Henry in Womens matters was so great at that time as the Earl could have no remedy but only that his said Sister who lived many years after had an Annuity out of the said Marquesses Lands during her life and lived some years after the said Marquess afterwards made Duke was put to death in Queen Maries time These then are three ways by which the Family of Darby to argue the Issue of Hartford to be Illegitimate but the other two Houses of Scotland and Clarence do urge a former Bastardy also that is common to them both to wit both against the Lady Frances and the Lady Eleanor for that the Lord Charles Brandon also Duke of Suffolk had a Wife alive as before hath been signified when he married the Lady Mary Queen of France by which former Wife he had Issue the Lady Powis I mean the Wife of my Lord Powis of Poistlands in Wales and how long after the new Marriage of her Husband Charles Brandon this former Wife did live I cannot set down distinctly though I think it were not hard to take particular information thereof in England by the Register of the Church wherein she was buried But the Friends of the Countess of Darby do affirm that she died before the Birth of the Lady Eleanor the second Daughter though after the Birth of the Lady Frances and thereby they do seek to clear the Family of Darby of this Bastardy and to lay all four upon the Children of Hartford before-mentioned But this is easie to be known and verified by the means before-signified But now the Friends of Hartford do answer to all these Bastardies That for the first two pretended by the marriages of the two Dukes of Suffolk that either the Causes might be such as their Divorces with their Wives might be lawful and prove them no Marriages and so give them place to marry again or else that the said former Wives did die before these Dukes that had been their Husbands so as by a â—oâ—t-contract and second new Consent given between the Parties when they were now free the said latter Marriages which were not good at the beginning might come to be lawful afterwards according as the Law permitteth notwithstanding that Children begotten in such pretended Marriages where one party is already bound are not made legitimate by subsequent true Marriage of their Parents And this for the first two Bastardies But as for the third Illegitimation of the Contract between the Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford by a Prae-contract made between the said Lady Katharine and the Earl of Pembroke that now liveth they say and affirm that Prae-contract to have been dissolved afterwards lawfully and judicially in the time of Queen Mary There remaineth then only the fourth Objection about the secret Marriage made between the said Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford before the Birth of their eldest Son now called Lord Beacham which to say the truth seemeth the hardest point to be answered For albeit in the sight of God that Marriage might be good and lawful if before their carnal knowledge they gave mutual consent the one to the other to be man and Wife and with that mind and intention had carnal Copulation which thing is also allowed by the late Council of Trent it self which disannulleth otherwise all clandestine and secret Contracts in such States and Countries where the authority of the said Council is received and admitted yet to justifie these kind of Marriages in the face of the Church and to make the Issue thereof legitimate and inheritable to Estates and Possessions it is necessary by all Law and in all Nations that there should be some witness to testifie this Consent and Contract of the parties before their carnal knowledge for that otherwise it should lie in every particular mans hand to legitimate any Bastard of his by his only word to the prejudice of others that might in equity of Succession pretend to be his Heirs and therefore no doubt but that the Archbishop of Canterbury had great reason to pronounce this Contract of the Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford to be insufficient and unlawful though themselves did affirm that they had given mutual Consent before of being Man and Wife and that they came together animo maritali as the Law of Wedlock requireth but yet for that they were not able to prove their said former consent by lawful Witnesses their said Conjunction was rightly pronounced unlawful and so I conclude that the first Son of these two Parties might be legitimate before God and yet illegitimate before men and consequently incapable of all such Succession as otherwise he might pretend by his said Mother And this now is for the first begotten of these two persons for as touching the second Child begotten in the Tower of London divers men of opinion that he may be freed of this Bastardy for that both the Earl and the Lady being examined upon their first Child did confess and affirm that they were Man and Wife and that they had meaning so to be and continue which Confession is thought to be sufficient both for ratifying of their old Contract and also for making of a new if the other had not been made before And seeing that in the former pretended Contract and Marriage there wanted nothing for justifying the same before men and for making it good in Law but only external Testimony of Witnesses for proving that they gave such mutual Consent of minds before their Carnal knowledge for the presence of Priest or Minister is not absolutely necessary no man can say that there wanted Witnesses for testifying of this Consent before second Copulation by which was begotten the second Son for that both the Queen her self and her Council and as many besides as examined these Parties upon their first Act and Child-birth are Witnesses unto them that their full Consents and Approbations to be Man and Wife which they ratified afterward in the Tower by the begetting of their second Child and so for the reasons aforesaid he must needs seem to be legitimate whatsoever my Lord of Canterbury for that time or in respect of the great Offence taken by the Estate against that Act did or might determine to the contrary And this is the sum of that which commonly is treated about these two Families of the House of Suffolk to wit of Hartford and Darby both which Families of Suffolk the other two opposite Houses of Scotland and Clarence do seek to exclude by the first Bastardy or unlawful Contract between the Queen of France and Duke Charles Brandon as hath been seen Of which Bastardy the House of Darby doth endeavour to avoid it self in manner as
Stow that he had all mens Good-will and was Crowned as his Brother had been at Kingston by Odo Arch-bishop of Canterbury and Reigned nine years with great good will and praise of all men He dyed at last without Issue and so his Elder Nephew Edwin was admitted to the Crown but yet after four years he was deposed again for his lewd and vitious Life and his younger brother Edgar admitted in his place in the year of Christ 959 This King Edgar that entred by deposition of his Brother was one of the rarest Princes that the World had in his time both for Peace and War Justice Piety and Valour Stow saith he kept a Navy of three thousand and six hundred Ships distributed in divers Parts for defence of the Realm Also that he built and restored 47 Monasteries at his own Charges and did other many such Acts he was Father to King Edward the Martyr and Grandfather to King Edward the Confessor though by two different Wives for by his first Wife named Egilfred he had Edwarâ— after martyrized and by his second Wife Alfred he had Etheldred Father to Edward the Confessor and to the end that Etheldred might Reign his Mother Alfred caused King Edward the son of Egilfred to be slain after King Edgar her Husband was dead After this so shameful Murther of King Edward many good men of the Realm were of opinion not to admit the Succession of Etheldred his half Brother both in respect of the Murther of King Edward his elder Brother committed for his sake as also for that he seemed a man not fit to Govern and of this opinion among others was the Holy man Dunston Archbishop of Canterbury as Polidor saith who at length in flat words denyed to consecrate him but seeing the most part of the Realm bent on Etheldred's side he foretold them that it would repent them after and that in this man's Life the Realm should be destroyed as indeed it was and he ran away to Normandy and left Sweno and his Danes in possession of the Realm though afterwards Sweno being dead he returned again and dyed in London This Etheldred had two Wives the first Ethelgina an English Woman by whom he had Prince Edmund sirnamed Ironside for his great strength and valour who succeeded his Father in the Crown of England for a year and at his death left two Sons which after shall be named and besides this Etheldred had by his first Wife other two Sons Edwin and Adelston and one Daughter named Edgina all which were either slain by the Danes or dyed without issue The second Wife of Etheldred was called Emma Sister to Richard Duke of Normandy who was Grandfather to William the Conquerour to wit Father to Duke Robert that was Father to William so as Emma was great Aunt to this William and she bare unto King Etheldred two Sons the First Edward who was afterwards named King Edward the Confessor Alerud who was slain traiterously by the Earl of Kent as presently we shall shew After the death also of King Etheldred Queen Emma was married to the Dane King Canutus the first of that name sirnamed the Great that was King of England after Etheldred and Edmond Ironside his Son and to him she bare a Son named Hardicaâ—utus who Reigned also in England before King Edward the Confessor Now then to come to our Purpose he that will consider the passing of the Crown of England from the death of Edmond Ironside elder Son of King Etheldred until the possession thereof gotten by William Duke of Normandy to wit for the space of 50 years shall easily see what authority the Commonwealth hath in such Affairs to alter titles of Succession according as publick necessity or utility stall require for thus briefly the matter passed King Etheldred seeing himself too weak for Sweno the King of Danes that was entred the Land fled with his Wife Emma and her two children Edward and Alerud unto her Brother Duke Richard of Normandy and there remained until the death of Sweno and he being dead Etheldred returned into England made a certain Agreement and Division of the Realm between him and Canutus the son of Sweno and so dyed leaving his eldest Son Edmond Ironside to succeed him who soon after dying also left the whole Realm to the said Canutus and that by plain Covenant as Canutus pretended that the Longest Liver should have all whereupon the said Canutus took the two Children of King Edmond Ironside named Edmond and Edward and sent them over into Sweedland which at that time was subject also unto him and caused them to be brought up honourably of which Two the Elder named Edmond dyed without issue but Edward was married and had divers Children as after shall be touched Etheldred and his Son Edmond being dead Canutus the Dane was admitted for King of England by the whole Parliament and Consent of the Realm and Crowned by Alerud Archbishop of Canterbury as Polidor saith and he proved an excellent King went to Rome and was allowed by that See also He did many Works of Charity shewed himself a good Christian and very loving and kind to Englishmen married Queen Emma an Englishwoman and Mother to King Edward the Confessor and had by her a Son named Hardicanutus and so dyed and was much mourned by the English after he had Reigned twenty Years though his entrance and Title was partly by Force and partly by Election as before you heard After this Canutus the First sirnamed the Great for that he was King jointly both of England Norway and Denmark was dead Polidor saith that all the States of the Realm met together at Oxford to consult whom they should make King and at last by the more part of Voices was chosen Herauld the first Son of Canutus by a Concubine by which Election we see injury was done to the Lineal Succession of three Parties first to the Sons of King Edmond Ironside that were in Sweedland then to the Princes of Edward and Alerud Sons to King Etheldred and Brothers to Ironside that were in Normandy and thirdly to Hardicanutus Son to Canutus by his Lawful Wife Emma to whom it was also assured at her Marriage that her Issue should succeed if she had any by Canutus After the death of this Harald who dyed in Oxford where he was elected within three years after his Election there came from Denmark Hardicanutus to claim the Crown that his Father and Brother had possessed before him of whose Coming Polidor saith libentissimis animis accipitur communique omnium consensu Rex dicitur He was received with great good-will of all and by common Consent made King and this was done by the States without any respect had of the Succession of those Princes in Normandy and Swedeland and who by birth were before him as hath been shewed and this is the second breach of Lineal Descent after Etheldred