Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	lease_n	say_a	tenement_n	1,679	5	11.3613	5	false

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

purpose of the Parlament is satisfied for such causes as we haue and shall hereafter more largely declare And if it were otherwise true yet doth this only defect of the Kinges hand breake infringe the whole Acte VVhy the stampe can not counteruaile the Kinges hand in this case For this is a statute correctorie and derogatorie to the commō course of the lawe as cutting away the succession of the lawfull true inheritours It is also as appeareth by the tenour of the same a most greuouse penal lawe and therfore we may not shift or alter the wordes of the lawe Neither may we supply the manner and doing of the acte prescribed by any other act equiualent So that albeit in some other thing the Stampe or the Kinges certaine knowen consente may counterpaise his hande yet as the case standeth here it will not serue the turne by reason there is a precise order and forme prescribed appointed VVerfore if by a statue of a Citie Ioan Andr in adit specul tit derequisit consul ad finem there be certaine persones appointed to do a certaine acte and the whole people do the same acte in the presence of the said persones the acte by the iudgement of learned Ciuilians is vitious of no valewe yea though the reason of the lawe cease yet must the forme be obserued For it is a rule and a maxime that where the law appointeth prescribeth a certaine platforme L. Si fundus ff de rebus eorum c. de rebus Ecclesiae in 6. whereby the Acte must be bound and tyed in that case though the reason of the lawe ceasse yet is the acte voyd and naught And whereas the Aduersaries obiecte against this rule the Parlamentes made by Queene Marie An ansvvere to the aduersaries touchinge Actes of Parlament alleaged to proue that the Kinges ovvne hād vvas not necessarie to the supposed vvil without the vsual style called somoned this obiection may sone be answered For it may sone appeare to all them that reade and pervse the said statute of Anno 35. Henrici octaui conteining the said style that by any especial words therin mētioned it is not there limited appointed that the forme of the style therin sette foorth should be obserued in euery writ And therfore not to be compared vnto the said statutes of 28. and 35. Henrici octaui wherein by special wordes one expresse forme order for the limiting of the succession of the Croune by the King is declared and set forth Bysides that the said writtes being made both according to the auncient forme of the Regester and also by expresse commaundement of the Prince vtterly refusing the said style could neither be derogatorie to the said Queenes Maiestie and her Croune nor meaning of the said statute Cōcerning the said style and for a final and ful answere vnto this matter it is to be noted that the writtes being the Actes of the Court though they want the prescript forme set foorth either by the cōmon law or statute yet are not they nor the iudgements subsequent ther vpon abated or void but only abatable and voidable by exception of the partie by iudgemēte of the the Court. 18. E. 3. fo 30. 3. H. 4 fol. 3. 11. 11. H. 4. fol. 67. 9. H. 6. fol. 6. 19. H. 6 fo 7. 10 35. H. 6. fo 12. 10. H. 6. fol. 16. 3. H. 6 fo 8. 33. E. 3. fo 13. Vide Prisot 33. H. 6. fol. 35. For if the partie without any exceptiō doe admitte the forme of the said VVritte and pleade vnto the matter whervpon the Court doth procede then doth the VVritte the iudgement there vpon following remanine good and effectual in lawe And therefore admiting that the said statute of 35. H. 8. had by speciall wordes appointed the said style to be put in euery VVritte and that for that cause the said VVritts of Somons were vitious wanting their prescript forme yet when the parties vnto the said VVrittes had admitted them for good both by theyr election and also by their appearence vpon the same the lawe doth admit the said VVrittes al actes subsequent vpon the same to be good and effectuall And yet this maketh no prooffe that therfore the said supposed will wanting the prescript order fourme should likewise be good and effectual in lawe For as touching specialties estates and conueiances or any other externall acte to be done or made by any person whose forme and order is prescribed either by the common lawe or by statute 9. H. 6. fol. 35. 35. H. 6. fo 34. 40. E. 3. fol. 2. if they want any part of their prescript forme they are accompted in law to be of no validitie or effect As for example the lawe doth appoint euery Specialtie or Deede to be made either in the first persone or in the third persone Therefore if parte of a Deede be made in the first person and the residue in the third person that Deede is not effectual but void in the Law Bysides that the lawe hath appointed 40. E. 3. fol. 35. 21. E. 4. fo 97 7. H. 7. fo 15. that in euery Deede mentioned should be made that the partie hath put to his Seale to the same If therfore any Deede doth want that special clause and mention although the partie in deede hath put his Seale vnto the same yet is that Dede or Specialtie void in law So lykewise the lawe geueth authoritie to the Lord to distraine vpon the land holden of him for his rentes seruices due for the same And farther doth appoint to carie or driue the same distresse vnto the pound there to remaine as a gage in lawe for his said rentes seruices 9. E. 4. fol. 2. 22. E. 4 fo 47. 29. H. 6. fo 6. 29. lib. Assis P. 64. If the Lord shal either distraine his Tenant out of his Fee or Seignory or if he shal labour and occupie the Chatles distrained the distresse so taken by him is iniurious wrōgful in law forasmuch as he hath not done according to the prescribed order of the lawe The statute made An. 32. H. 8. geueth authoritie vnto Tenant in taile and to others being seised of land in the right of their wiues or Churches to make leases of the same VVherin also a prescript order and forme for the same is set foorth If any of the said persons shal make any Lease wherin he doth not obserue the same prescribed order in all pointes the same lease is not warranted in any point by the said statute Likewise the statute made in Anno 27. 27. H. 8. 6. 10. Henrici octaui of Bargaines and sales of land appointeth a forme and order for the same that they must be by writing indented sealed and enrolled within six monethes next after the dates of the same writings If any bargaine and sale of land be made wherein any of the thinges appointed by the said

as other heires should VVhervpon it is to be gathered by dew iust cōstruction of the same statute and hath bene heretofore commonly taken that the common lawe alwayes was yet is that no persone born out of the allegeāce of the king of England whose father and mother were not of the same allegeance should be able to haue or demaund any heritage within the same algeance as heire to any person VVhiche rule I take to be the same supposed Maxime that the aduersaries do meane But to stretche it generally to all inheritāces as the aduersaries woulde seeme to do by any reasonable meanes can not be The statute of Edvv. 3. An. 25. touchetb inberitance not purchase 11. H. 4. fol. 25. For as I haue said before euery stranger and Alien borne may haue and take inheritance as a purchaser And if an Alien do Marie a woman inheritable the inheritance therby is both in the Alien also in his wife the Alien thereby a purchaser No man doubteth but that a Denizon maye purchase landes to his owne vse but to inherit landes as heire to any person within the allegeance of England he can not by any meanes So that it seemeth very plaine that the said rule bindeth also Denyzons doth onely extend to Descentes of inheritance and not to the hauing of any lande by purchse Now will we then consider whether this rule by any reasonable cōstruction can extend vnto the Lady Marie the Queene of Scotland for and concerning her title to the Croune of England It hath bene said by the Aduersaries that she was borne in Scotland whiche realm is out of the allegeance of England her father and mother not being of the same allegeāce therfore by the said rule she is not inheritable to the Croune of England Though I might at the beginning very wel and orderly deny the consequent of this argumente yet I wil first examin the Antecedent euen by the cōmon opinion and sentence of English men then will I consider vpon the consequent And this I intend of purpose only to discouer the improuidence of the aduersaries whiche in a matter where they couet most to looke vnto them selues there they least of all prouide for the warrantize of theyr cause by their owne pretensed lawes of the Realme of England But I mynde not hereupon so to ouer rule the matter as any preiudice may thereby be created against the Kynges of Scotland who haue alwayes kept and still doe kepe and enioye with a plain profession most iust clame in their owne right ouer their subiectes a supreme authoritie power not depending by any lawe right or custome vpon any other Prince or potentate in the world VVell then to come to the Antecedent so it is that the Queene of Scotland was borne in Scotland it must nedes be graunted but that Scotland is out of the allegeance of England though the sayde Queene and all her subiectes doe iustlye affirme the same yet there is a verie greate number of men in England both learned and others whiche are not of that opinion but earnestly auouche the contrary being led persuaded therunto as they say by diuerse Histories Registers Recordes and Instruments remayninge in the Treasurie of that Realme wherin is mentioned as they also saye that the Kynges of Scotland haue acknouleged the Kyng of England to be the superiour Lorde ouer the Realme of Scotland haue done homage and fealtie for the same VVhich being true though all Scotsmen denie it as Iustlie they may for the homage fealtie whiche those men speake of was not exhibited nor done in any such respect as they surmise but in consideration of the tenures of certein Segnories Lands tenements hereditaments lyeing in Northumberland Cumberland other Shyres of England whiche now the Kinges of Scotland want and then did enioye holde of the Kyng of England As cōmonlie it is sene in sondrie parts of Christindome Kyngs and Princes hauyng distinct and absolute regiments not depending of any other potentate to holde neuerthelesse one of an other diuerse landes townes and countries lyeing within the marches of the one or the others dominions But admit it to be true whiche these men doe so auouche then Scotlande must nedes be accompted within the allegeance of England euen by their owne lawes of the same Realme and by the common opinion of their owne nation And although sins the tyme of Kinge Henry the sixt none of the Kinges of Scotlande haue done the said seruice vnto the Kinges of England yet that is no reason in the lawe of England to saye that therefore the Realme of Scotland at the tyme of the birth of the sayd Ladie Marie Queene of Scotlande being in the thirtie and fourth yeare of the raigne of the late Kinge Henrie the eight was out of the allegeance of the Kinges of England For the lawe of that Realme is very plain that though the Tenant do not his seruice vnto the Lorde yet hath not the Lord thereby lost his Seignorie The Lorde loseth not his seignorie though the tenante doth not his seruice For the lande still remaineth within his Fee Seignorie that notwithstanding But peraduenture some will obiecte and saye that by this reason France should likewise be said to be within the allegeance of England forasmuch as the possessiō of the Croune of France hath bene within a litle more then the space of one hundred yeares nowe last past laufully vested in the Kinges of England whose right and title still remaineth To that obiection it may be answered that there is a great differēce betwene the right title which the kings of England clame to the Realm of Frāce the right title which they clame to the Realme of Scotlād For although it be true that the kings of Englād haue bene lawfully possessed of the Croune of France yet during such time as they by vsurpation of others are dispossessed of the said Realme of Fraunce the same Realme by no meanes can be said to be within their allegeance especially considering how that syns the time of vsurpation the people of France haue wholy forsaken their allegeance and subiectiō which they did owe vnto the kings of England haue geuen submitted them selues vnder the obediēce allegeāce of the frēsh But as for the Realme of Scotlande it is otherwise For the Title whiche the Kinges of England by the opinion of these men may clame to the Realme of Scotland is not in the possession of the lande and Croune of Scotlande but onely in the seruice of homage and fealtie for the same And though the Kinges of Scotland many yeres haue intermitted to doe the said homage fealtie vnto the Kinges of Englande yet for all that the Kinges of Scotland can not by any reason or lawe be called vsurpers and vniust possessors And thus all indifferente men not ledd by affections may well see by the recordes testimonies of