Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	daughter_n	earl_n	heir_n	18,448	5	7.9471	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90520	Jus fratrum, The law of brethren. Touching the power of parents, to dispose of their estates to their children, or to others. The prerogative of the eldest, and the rights and priviledges of the younger brothers. Shewing the variety of customes in several counties, and the preservation of families, collected out of the common, cannon, civil, and statute laws of England. / By John Page, late Master in Chancery, and Dr. of the Civil Law.	Page, John, LL.D.	1657 (1657)	Wing P164; Thomason E1669_3; ESTC R203096	43,631	124

it is alledged to as little purpose as the other for neither Bruce nor Roderic did disinherit their eldest sons but gave them a better and greater part then unto the rest and surely no man can think they did well to make such divisions because their actions did not prosper but now God be thanked they are again reunited into one glorious Monarchy and may they ever so continue as long as the world shall continue in the Koyal Line of our Gracious Soveraign who is descended to his Imperial Diadem by the most noble and only rightful way of inheritance which is from the next of blood to the next of blood or from one eldest son unto another Proof 35. That there is a Law or custome in Ireland called Tanistrie by which the land and Chiefty of a name after the Predecessours death is not awarded to the eldest son but to the worthiest the judgment whereof is left to the people and such Tennants as have interest and right of suffrage as Alexander the great though as 't is apparent in the Macchabees very falsly said to have left his Empire And that the tenure or custome of Gavell kind allows every son to have an equal share in the estate Answ It is marvel that the Apologer will acknowledge the Book of the Machabees to be Apocrypha because it seems to make something for his pretended free power of Parents and it is marvel he doth not condemn this Irish custome to be Apocrypha for there is nothing can make more against his power because upon the matter the futhers authority and the fortunes of the family are in the power of the Tennants he sayes that all customes which are against Law are void by the civil Law and he knows also that a great part of this prople are still called the wild Irish and surely such customes are fitter for wild Savages then for civil Christians And concerning the tenure or custome of Gavell kind it is true that it gives an equal share of the estate to every son but as I take it this custome was chiefly and I think only in Kent and the Apologer grants that some have altred it in their private Families by Act of Parliament and doubtless the cause hath been for the preservation of their Families which by such divisions could not chuse but come in short time to nothing and level the best and greatest of our Gentry to the degree of the meanest Vulgars Proof 36. That Briand Lyle or Fitzt earl Lord of Abergavenny having two sons both leaprous built for them a Lazaretto or Spittle and gave to Miles Earl of Hereford the greater part of his Patrimony from his children Jane daughter of Hugh Courtney and heir to her Mother wife of Nicholas Lord Carew disinherited her eldest son Thomas quoniam minus reverenter matrem haberet and parted her lands which were goodly among her three younger sons of whom are sp●…ng three worshipful Families of the Carews called Haccomb Ancony and Bury So that God by the success crowned the fact and confirmed the lawfulnesse of partage Answ The Lord Abergavenny did well in giving away a great part of his lands away from his two sons for a Spittle was more fit for such sons then an inheritance yet he left them a great part of his lands and doubtless would have left them all had they not been leprous and unfit And the Lady Carew did well in giving her lands to her younger sons her eldest son being heir to his father and having as may be thought a sufficient competency of estate but the true cause was because he was undutiful which had he not been it is likely she had given him the greatest part if not all of her inherited lands And you know Mr. Apologer there is a different case betwixt an eldest son who inherits an estate from his father and a daughter who is an inheritrix for the son is to do that which hath been done to him and as he received an inheritance from his father because he was the eldest son so is he bound conscience not to disinherit his eldest son because he would have been loth to have been disinherited himself and that which we would not that others should do to us we are not to do to any other Matth 7. Luke 6. This is the very corner stone as I may well call it of the Law of Nature and of the Law of Grace especially for so much as concerns morality and distributive justice but women who are no fit presidents for men have a greater freedome then men in this case for they inherit by way of Parcenary and every daughter hath an equal share in the estate though the eldest by reason of her Seniority hath the priviledge to chuse first and an inheritrix hath the name of her Family extinct in her self and therefore may at her pleasure disperse her lands amongst her sons the better to preserve the memory of her self and Ancestours from whom she is descended and no marvel though God did bless with good successe the good acts of this Lady for she did both justly and wisely But who hath known an estate long prosper where a dutiful and deserving eldest son was disinherited by his father I must confesse I never did such unrightful and lawlesse heirs may be likened to the Bastard plants which the Wise man speaks of Wisd 3. and 4. that cannot take deep root nor lay sure foundation So that all these examples by the Apologer alledged are like his other arguments they either make against himself or serve to no purpose To the Reader I Have here answered as well as I can all the Apologers proofs and reasons on the behalf of his younger Brothers and I confess that according to the best of my poor judgement I have not found any one firm or sinewy argument which may satisfie any reasonable understanding in proof of his so absolute a free power of Parents or against the impregnable rights and prerogatives of eldest sons But I must not usurp upon anothers right the censure belongs to the impartial and judicious Reader unto whom I humbly commend it THE Second Part Wherein is Treated of The preservation of Families The free power of Parents The Rights of eldest sons Printed for H. Fletcher 1548. The preservation of Families ELder Brothers sayes the Apologer either seated in their fathers wealth or possessions or having more then hopes to enjoy their fortunes do sometimes love truly neither themselves nor any body else but abusing that which indeed might gain the love of God and man and easily maintain their hereditary honour lose themselves in vanity and most idle courses yea in their fathers lives so strangely carry themselves presuming rather on precedence of birth then worth as though the Law of God and Nature and all other Cannon Civil and National Laws and constitutions and customes sprung from them could not either in reason or religion bar them of that which they expect or

can to prove that eldest sons have no more right to inherit then other sons all is as pleases the father for he is the supream and absolute Lord of the estate and may lawfully and religiously dispose thereof at his pleasure He tells us that he never read any Authour of this Subject and why then should he so much presume of his self-sufficiency and extraordinary spirit that he should think he may deserve credit himself telling us that he is the singularis homo the only man who first disputed hereof or ever brought the matter in question Marry I 'll tell you but then you must take his own words for it he sayes that he believes he hath spoken according to dialectical reason and that there hath been nothing spoken of it heretofore truly which reason hath not dictated to all Authours pens and you shall now see what a messe of reason he doth serve in for his purpose He sayes in his Epistle that there is a natural reverence due unto the eldest sons from their younger brothers he sayes that it was the use of the Israelites to prefer their eldest sons to the better part of their possessions and that it is now the more general practise of Christian Parents to leave either all or the most part of their lands to their eldest sons and he honestly gives these two reasons why it should so be The first is because there is a natural reverence due unto the elder brothers The second is because this custome had its original from the imitation of Princes and for the preservation of Families and that an equal division of the lands and goods amongst all the children will bring an estate to nothing or to so little that it may be compared unto an attome in the Sun He sayes that at first fathers and then first born after them were as Kings and Priests in their own houses He sayes that our Common Laws give the right of inheritance to eldest sons He cites a Divine Precept Deut. 21. which plainly proves the rights of eldest sons He sayes that we find in holy Writ great respect was had of the first begotten and a blessing was held to come to Parents thereby You may see here how sufficiently the Apologer hath argued on the behalf of his younger brothers for I know not what he can say more that can more advance the rights of eldest sons But leaving the Apologer I will a little more dilate my self not so much in proof as in illustration of the premises The very vegetables and unreasonable creatures are no mean arguments of the excellency of Primogeniture How grateful to the Planter and indeed how much more vigorous and excellent are the first fruits of plants more then other productions and how fully do the first fruits of a new broken up ground content and satisfie the longing hopes of the honest husbandman and after some few crops how poorly doth the same earth discharge it self of its burthens and this was the reason why the first fruites were in the old Law reserved for the most sacred uses and so it was meet for God who is the giver of all good things should be served with the best of those things which himself hath given The very beasts and birds do no lesse declare the excellency of Primogeniture for it is generally observed that the Parent birds do use to feed their young ones as their young ones are in seniority yielding as it were a kind of right or a natural and lawful precedence unto the eldest and the very nest gull or the youngest of the young feathered creatures doth plainly demonstrate how much more perfect and excellent the senior birds are above their younger Salvianus lib. 4. de gubern Dei Aristotle and divers others do make excellent Discourses concerning the seeming prudence and piety of the Storks and Bees and shall the Bees yield to order and have a Commonwealth amongst them and shall ' the reasonable creature called Man be more unreasonable then they and have no rule or order of inheritance in their own Families but at the fathers affection and will They also deliver that the young of all creatures do observe a kind of reverence and obedience to their elder young and that the eldest young doth use to suck at the uppermost teat and the younger young will not so much as presume to usurp upon the rights of the eldest nor their Parents suffer it These things if rightly weighed are of no mean consideration concerning the excellency of Primogeniture and consequently of the rights and prerogatives of eldest sons and the saying of Job chap. 12. is no insufficient answer to any one who would disparage the rights of eldest sons Interrogato jumenta ask the beasts and they will teach you But that which is most considerable next to the Divine Precepts is the sacred esteem of Primogeniture amongst the elected people of God for with them as appears Exod. 13. and 34. Numb 38. c. the first born of the very beasts were exempted from work and fathers and their first born after them were as Kings and Priests in their own houses And it hath pleased the Divine Majesty to the infinite glory of Primogeniture to sanctifie unto himself all the first born of the male-kind calling them his and to call his Church triumphant the Church of the first born Hebr. 12. Nay even to call his Divine self who hath been from all eternity unbegotten his first begotten son Coloss 3. But these are no precepts that fathers should endow their eldest sons with the greatest part of the estate It is true yet are they good motives great instructions and may be taken for no lesse then precepts in any pious understanding for we are to elect and love whom God electeth and loveth and since it hath pleased God to elect and prefer our eldest sons in a higher degree of excellency then any other our children we are therefore to elect and prefer our eldest sons in a higher degree of inheritance then any other our children And can it be suppos'd that God would leave us in suspence concerning so high a point as is inheritance which is indeed the main ground and foundation of all humane Laws and therefore it hath pleased the Divine Majesty to impose this his great command upon his elected people which was that if any one of them died without a son his inheritance should go to his daughters and if he had no daughters to his brethren and if he had no brethren to his fathers brethren c. and that this should be a perpetual Law as the Lord commanded Moses Numb 27. By which it is evident that one son in particular and not sons in general ought to be heir and be endowed with the prime Blessing or Patrimony unto which accordeth an Apostle saying Gal. 4. as long as the heir is a little one he differeth nothing from a servant though he be Lord of all and the Apostle meant