his death his Son Edward having less to answer for and success to recommend him to the People upon more specious pretences succeeded H. 6. by a manifest election Tho' he and his Father had upon the agreement established in Parliament sworn to be true to H. 6. during his life or till he should freely quit his Crown the dread of their Arms got a liberty for 'em to enter their protestations that this was upon the express condition that the King performed his part but if he should compass or imagine the death or destruction of the Duke or his Blood should forfeit the Crown And indeed it seems that the first acts of Hostility after this agreement were committed by the Queen and others of the King's Party who in attempting to rescue him out of the custody of the Duke of York put an end to his pretensions with his life But his Son Edward having routed the Earl of Pembroke and other the King 's Loyal Subjects in a Battle near Ludlow march'd up to London where he was received with joy on the 28 th of February Then he calls a Great Council of Peers to whom he opens his claim upon the King's breach of the Articles After the Lords had considered of the matter they determined by Authority of the said Council that forasmuch as King Henry contrary to his Oath Honor and Agreement had violated and infringed the order taken and enacted in the last Parliament and also because he was insufficient to rule the Realms and unprofitable to the Common-wealth he was therefore by the aforesaid Authority deprived and dejected of all Kingly Honor and Regal Sovereignty and incontinent Edward Earl of March was by the Lords in the said Counseil assembled named elected and admitted for King and Governour of the Realm After this the same day the consent of the common People was ask'd in St. John's Fields where a great number were assembled The Lords being informed of the consent of the Commons acquainted the said Earl with their election and admission and the loving assent of the Commons The next day he went to Westminster where his Title and Claim to the Crown was declared 1. As Son and Heir to Richard his Father right Inheriter to the same 2. By Authority of Parliament 3. And forfeiture committed by H. 6. The Commons being again demanded if they would admit and take the said Earl as their Sovereign Lord all with one voice cried yea yea which agreement concluded he was then proclaimed Here it is observable 1. That Edward did not claim upon any Title Prior to the Settlement in Parliament 39 H. 6. and therefore in effect claimed as adopted Heir to H. 6. as H. 2. had been to King Stephen 2. He alledges against H. 6. forfeiture by breach of the Contrac̄t establish'd in Parliament and a Moral incapacity in him to Reign 3. Notwithstanding this he does not set up as King before a solemn judgment pronounced against H. 6. and in favour of him and the formallity of a publick election 4. It appears that tho' he came to London and was possessed of the head and strength of the Kingdom and Hen. 6. had in effect abdicated he who according to the modern notion of the Successionaries should have been King upon the death of his Father was not King nor so reputed by his own Party till all those accustomed ceremonies were over the last of which was on the 4 th of March Now if it shall prove that in the judgment of King Edward's own Parliament his right ot turn H. 6. out of Possession was founded in H. 6 ths breach of the Contract establish'd in Parliament that E. 4. was not King till the 4 th of March and that no Act committed against him before that day was Treason nor was there or could there be Treason against his Father who never had been King then it will appear that some consent or election of the States or People was essentially necessary to make a King even of one who had or at least was suppos'd to have all the right that descent could give him and that the other King must have forfeited or ceased to be King before such right could be duely claimed But 1. The Act of Parliament declaring E. 4 ths Title is held to be a restitution to the same so that the very Title or Right was as if it had been extinguished 2. It is in that Act particularly insisted on that H. 6. had declared before witness that he would not keep the contract established in Parliament and is expresly charged with the breach of it 3. E. 4. is adjudged to have been in lawful Possession of the Realm upon the 4 th of March and on that day lawfully seized and possessed But not before and then the exercice of the Royal Estate by E. 4. and amotion of H. 6. are declared rightwise lawful and according to the Laws and Customs of the Realm 4. That Act says the Crown ought to have descended to Edward's Ancestor and after his decease to the next Heir of Blood if the same Usurpation had not been committed Wherefore according to that Act the Crown did not descend to any one of Mortimer's Family while the Person who they supposed to have usurped the Crown or any descendant from him kept Possession 5. Edward's Parliament held his Father to have been no more than Duke of York and tho' in the Act attainting H. 6. he is charged with the Murder of Richard Duke of York the first Treasonable Fact in H. 6. and others is laid in levying War on the 29 th of March and imagining to depose their Sovereign Lord Edward who had been declared King on the 4 th of that March and H. 6 ths forfeiture is laid in acting against his Faith and Allegiance to his Sovereign Lord whereby they plainly shew that as there could be no Treason against the Duke of York because he was never received for Sovereign Lord neither could there have been any against E. 4. unless he had been so received 6. If any now will own his present Majesty to have right by Law and yet refuse to declare him rightful King They go no farther then E. 4. and his Party did even after his Possession in relation to such as they held to be Usurpers And should such Men add that neither has the late King any right as it is probable that they mean that he has no right making him King they therein would still keep to that President But then if they would exactly follow that they must believe that the late King cannot be duely restored to the Regal Dignity till he should be received by the election or consent of the States or Body of the People nor could that be rightfully done unless his present Majesty in a legal sense ceased to be King before such election or consent Thus far I am sure they cannot
might afterwards sail out of abundant care for his Son Henry had him Crowned in his life time which through French Counsels put the Son upon insisting on the Rights of Kingship to the great clamity of the Nation tho' the Subjects swore Allegiance to him with an express Salvo for the Allegiance due to his Father Which whatever some have thought or affirm'd was the only Salvo in the Scotch Kings homage according to ancient custom for the Crown of Scotland To H. 2. succeeded his eldest surviving Son Richard but was not accounted King upon the death of his Father Authors say he was to be promoted to be King by Hereditary Right which is far from being King by Hereditary Right But as the former usage explains such words he deserved to be elected and made King in which sense one of the Authors who lived at the time immediately explains himself mentioning his Coronation Oath after the solemn and due election as well of the Clergy as People Before this he was at first only Earl of Poictou and then Duke of Normandy but not till he had been solemnly invested with the Sword of that Dukedom And Bromton informs us that he accepted the Crown upon condition of keeping his Coronation Oath without undertaking which the Archbishop charged him not to assume the Royal Dignity He going to the holy Wars after his being Crown'd his Brother John would have seiz'd the Government as vacant but had no tollerable pretence the War having been carried on with a National Consent Upon this it was adjudged by a Common-Council of the Kingdom that John should be disseiz'd of all that he held in England which might extend to such right or expectancy as he had in the Crown Notwithstanding which upon Richard's death the great Question came upon the Stage whether the Crown ought ordinarily to go according to the right of Proximity or of Representation The right of Proximity was in John Brother to King Richard this was the Right which the English seem'd to think most agreeable to the Constitution of this Monarchy and is according to the Custom of Normandy for Succession to that Dukedom and as Cujacius supposes of most Nations Foreigners were for Arthur of Brittain as having the right of Representation being the Son of John's elder Brother and this was the Right according to the custom of Brittain in France But as to the Law of England it appears by Glanvil's account of the Law as it was taken in the time of H. 2. that even for the Descent of private Inheritances it was doubtful whether they ought to go to the Grandson by the eldest Son who died in the Father's life time or to his next surviving Son If indeed the eldest Son had in the Father's life time done homage to the Chief Lord for his Father's Inheritance this was held to remove the doubt And Glanvil afterwards says upon the Question between Uncle and Nephew that the condition of the Possessor is the better According to which King John having obtained Possession of the Crown had it rightfully and Arthur had no right to turn him out John being beyond-sea at his Brother's death sent over the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Earl Marshal of England to sollicit for his being admitted to the Throne These Great Men with the assistance of the Chief Justice of England prevailed upon many to swear Allegiance to John and in a Convention at Northampton those Persons were Sponsors for John's doing right to all men upon which condition or in confidence of his performing what had been undertaken in his name the Earls and Barons swore Fidelity to him against all Men yet after this he was formally elected in a full Convention of the States where the Archbishop declares it as matter known to 'em all that no man ought to succeed an other to the Kingdom upon any previous reason unless unanimously elected by the whole Realm c. But if any one of the Royal Stock was more deserving than others his election ought to be consented to the more promptly and readily Notwithstanding what had pass'd in favour of John in the Convention the Archbishop at the time of the Coronation calls him but Earl King John not only took the Oath appointed by the standing Ritual which declares every King of England to be elected but assumed the Royal Dignity as his Predecessor did with the express condition of keeping his Oath Having broken this Contract and notoriously departed from that end for which according to the Confessors Law expresly sworn to by him he had been constituted or created King in making War upon his People with Foreign Forces with which he exercis'd inhuman barbarities and as much as in him lay alienating his Imperial Crown to the Pope he in the Judgment of the Court of France as well as of the States and People of England fell from his Royal Dignity the Throne was become vacant and during the vacancy the Administration devolved upon the States whereupon they resolved to elect a new King and sent a solemn Embassy to the King of France to send over his Son Lewis to be King of England whose wife was John's Sisters Daughter But the chief inducement to this Election seems to have been that expectation in which they were not deceived that the Foreigners would desert John for Lewis Tho they promised to Crown him King they seeing great grounds to dislike his French Temper and Conduct kept him upon his good behaviour without a Crown And having found by the dying Confession of one of his confederates that he had sworn if he came to be once Crowned King he would treat the English as Rebels to their former Prince they soon sent this Probationer packing yet did not hold John to be King After John's death many of the greatest interest in England while Lewis was here and Elianor Prince Arthur's Sister alive in Bristol Castle who according to the vulgar notion ought to have been Queen John's Son but were far from thinking him King upon the death of his Father or from repenting of what they had done to the Father but they thought it adviseable to cut off Lewis his expectation of the Crown to which end the Martial of England Summons a Convention to Glocester where he tells the States that tho' they had justly prosecuted the Father for his evil deeds yet that Infant was innocent because he is the Son of a King and our future Lord and Successer of the Kingdom let us Constitute him our King At last all as with one voice cried thrice let him be made King Here 't is evident that he was not accounted King till Constituted or made and was but a future Lord and agreeably to this Matthew Paris
REFLECTIONS UPON A Treasonable Opinion Industriously promoted Against SIGNING the National Association AND The Entring into it prov'd to be the Duty of all the Subjects of this KINGDOM Hoc quidem perspicuum est eos ad imperandum deligi solitos quorum de justitiâ magna esset opinio multitudinis adjuncto verò ut iidem etiam prudentes haberentur nihil erat quod homines his auctoribus non posse consequi se arbitrarentur Civ de of lib. 2. LONDON Printed and Sold by E. Whitlock near Stationers-Hall 1696. To His Excellency CHARLES Duke of SHREWSBURY one of the Lords Justices of England and one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State c. May it please your Excellency SINCE among the many subjects of just Praise which make up Excellency's distinction it is not the least that the true Religion and Loyalty are known to have been chosen with a Judgment properly your own my ambition could not carry me to a fitter Patron for Truths which are to encounter a strong Pre-possession in Men taught to object novelty against this Revolution tho' with as little cause of triumph as the Papists have for their question where was the Protestant Church before Luther As your Excellency's wise and vigorous discharge of Offices of the highest Trust and Consequence under our only rightful Sovereign King WILLIAM revives to France the noted Terrors in the name of Talbot permit me from thence to take an Omen of Success against Arguments supported by the French Interest and Power more than by any colour of reason Yet they who oppose the Right of the present Government having pretended to seeming Authorities I have used that method which I hope may be proper for their conviction giving a short view of what upon the various Exigencies of the Publick in all Ages of this Monarchy has been the uniform Judgment and regular Practice of Conventions of the States and Parliaments of this Kingdom in concurrence with several glorious Preservers of the English Liberties But that I may use an Authority sufficient in it self to justifie our present Settlement I beg leave to appeal to Excellency's early and eminent Example which will weigh more with Persons acquainted with so illustrious a Character than any Argument from pass'd Times And yet what I here offer being for the most part the Result of the Collective Wisdom of the Nation may not be wholly undeserving of your Excellency's Patrondge nor can I apprehend that you will refuse these Fundamental Truths the benefit of being recommended to the World under so Great a Name which tho' it will set my faults in the clearer light if your Excellency shall be thought to bear with 'em cannot but moderate the Censures against Your Excellency's most devoted humble Servant W. Atwood REFLECTIONS UPON A Treasonable Opinion c. THE Enemies of the Peace of these Realms having handed about a Paper as the Opinion of a certain florid Gentleman of the long Robe eminent for making New Treasons and whose Authority is said to have prevailed with several to refuse Signing the Associatlon for the defence of His Majesty's Sacred Person and Rightful Authority I shall offer what I conceive a sufficient Antidote to the Poyson he would spread with all his affected softness The words of the Opinion as they have occurr'd to me are these By the Statute of Hen. 7. the Subjects are Indemnified in taking an Oath or Fighting for a King de Facto But the Association is not within the Statute but an Overt Act of Treason against the King de Jure and Punishable as such when he shall be restored In refuteing the pernicious Errors contained in this Opinion I shall evince First That according to the best Authorities of them who suppose that there may be a King de Jure as distinguished from a King in Fact the Right of the supposed King de Jure is not such as makes any Act against him to be Treason nor is he King or has any Right against the King in Possession or his Issue Secondly That an Association for the Defence of the King's Person and Right is within the purview of the Stat. 11 H. 7. and that as plainly as an Oath of Allegianee Thirdly That it is not supposed or implyed in that Act that there was or might be a King de Jure while an other was King in Fact but that according to that Act the King for the time being is the onely Rightful King Fourthly That the Statute 11 H. 7. is not introductory of any new Law in this matter Fifthly That his Present Majesty is the only King de Jure and that the late King neither is nor of Right ought to be King Sixthly That according to this Gentleman 's own Law he is Guilty of High-Treason against our Sovereign Lord the King 1. The Lord Coke upon the Statute of Treason 25 E. 3. referring in the Margin to the Statute 11 H. 7. says This is to be understood of a King in Possession of the Crown and Kingdom For if there be a King Regnant in Possession altho' he be Rex de Facto and not de Jure yet he is Seignior le Roy within the purview of this Statute and the other who hath the Right and is out of Possession is not within this Act. Sir Mathew Hale says what in substance agrees with the Lord Coke A King says he speaking of the Statute 25 E. 3. de Facto and not de Jure is a King withing that Act and Treason against him is punishable tho' the right Heir get the Crown Indeed both those Great Men seem to suppose or admit that there might be one who had or at some time or other might have a sort of Right notwithstanding another's being so fully King that a Conspiracy to Kill or Depose him would be Treason But it is to be consider'd 1. That the Lord Coke does not suppose that there may be a King de Jure while another is King in Fact unless this supposition is warranted by the Statute 11 H. 7. which as I shall prove it is not 2. The Statute which in both their Judgments regards only the King Regnant makes it Treason to Conspire the Death of the King 's Eldest Son or to violate his Eldest Daughter for the last of which the Lord Coke assigns this Reason That for default of Issue Male she only is Inheritable to the Crown So that the supposed King de Jure appears to be barred not only by the Possession of the King in Fact but even by that Right which is Vested in his Son or Daughter before either of them have Possession And indeed That Right which ordinarily would descend to the Eldest Son of the King Regnant is truly explanatory of all that will be found to have belonged to one who since E. 4. of the elder branch of the Royal Stock got Possession has often been call'd King de Jure tho' as will appear in
a sence very different from the Modern vulgar Notion Nor does the Judgment even of E. the 4th's own Parliament in the least favour the late King however if it did later Parliaments in the time of H. 7. have taken away all colour from such pretences That the Eldest Son even of the most Rightful Regnant King was not King upon the Death of his Father without a Parliamentary Settlement of the Crown upon him before his Fathers Death nor with it till the States of the Kingdom had actually received and recognized such Son will appear beyond contradiction And that the Eldest Son 's Right was only a Right to be declared King unless he was unfit to Reign or the exigencies of the Publick required the advancing some other Person of the Royal Family If a deserving Person was kept back or one so judged by his own Party or the Nation when he prevailed the least Complement they could make him was that of Right he ought to have been King before he was King but farther they never extended their Transports of Loyalty nor ever Authoritatively declared That he had such a Right as made him King while another possessed the Throne And till he got Possession it was never declared that he had Right Nor does the setting one aside before his coming to Possession or after make any difference in the Nature of the Right in question And I shall put it beyond Controversie that whenever a worthy Person of the Saxon Royal Family especially of that branch which for some Successions had been settled as the Regnant Family was solemnly recognized by the States of the Kingdom upon the Death or disability of a Person who stood forwarder in the Royal Line the Person so recognized became King de Jure and no other Person had any manner of Right unless such as was in Abeiance or in the Clouds and indeed no where till Possession brought it to Light and Being 3. Fully to shew this Gentleman his mistakes upon the Statute 11 H. 7. it will be requisite to transcribe the whole which is as follows The King our Sovereign Lord calling to remembrance the Duty of Allegiance of his Subjects of this his Realm and that by reason of the same they are bound to serve their Prince and Sovereign Lord for the time being in his Wars for the Defence of him and the Land against every Rebellion Power and Might reared against him and with him to enter and abide in Service in Battle if case so require That for the same Service what Fortune ever fall by chance in the same Battle against the Mind and Will of the Prince as in this Land some time passed hath been seen that it is not reasonable but against all Laws Reason and good Conscience that the said Subjects going with their Sovereign Lord in Wars attending upon him in his Person or being in other places by his Commandment within this Land or without any thing should leese or forfeit for doing their true Duty and Service of Allegiance It be therefore Ordained Enacted and Established by the King our Sovereign Lord by the Advice and Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in this present Parliament Assembled and by the Authority of the same That from henceforth no manner of Person or Persons whatsoever he or they be that attend upon the King and Sovereign Lord of this Land for the time being in his Person and do him true and faithful Service of Allegiance in the same or be in other places by his Commandment in the Wars within this Land or without that for the said deed and true Duty of Allegiance he or they be in no wise Convict or Attaint of High-Treason or of other Offences for that Cause by Act of Parliament or otherwise by any Proces of Law whereby he or any of them shall now forfeit Life Lands Tenements Rents Possessions Hereditaments Goods Chatals or any other things but to be for that Deed and Service utterly discharged of any Vexation Trouble or Loss And if any Act or Acts or other Proces of the Law hereafter thereupon for the same happen to be made contrary to this Ordinance that then that Act or Acts or other Proces of Law whatsoever they shall be stand and be utterly void Provided always that no Person or Persons shall take any Benefit or Advantage by this Act which shall hereafter decline from his or their said Allegiance Here 't is observable 1st That whereas this Gentleman absurdly supposes that it is Treason to engage to fight against one whom one may lawfully kill and that one may enter into a contrary Allegiance but may not do any voluntary act of Allegiance it is evident by the Words that if Swearing Allegiance is safe so are all voluntary Acts of Allegiance for the Swearing is not expresly provided for by that Act or any otherwise than as it is a part of the Duty and Service of Allegiance to the Sovereign Lordâ— but if Associating for the Defence of the King's Person and Right be part of the Allegiance due then that is as much provided for as the Oath is and consequently this Gentleman must grant that the Statute 11 H. 7. indemnifies the present Associators That this is part of the Allegiance due appears by the Common-Law Oath of Allegiance affirmed in the Laws of W. 1. and continued down to this day in Substance and Obligation according to which all the Freemen of the whole Kingdom are to affirm with a League or Association and Oath that within and without the whole Kingdom of England they will be faithful to their Lord the King preserve his Lands and Honors with all fidelity together with his Person and defend them against Enemies and Strangers And in an other Chapter of that Law after Provision that all Freemen shall enjoy their Estates as had been before enacted and granted in a Common-Council of the whole Kingdom it adds We also enact and firmly enjoyn that all Freemen of the whole Kingdom be sworn Brethren or Associators to defend our Monarchy and our Kingdom according to their Strength and Faculties and manfully keep the Peace and preserve the Dignity of our Crown entire and constantly to maintain Right and just Judgment by all means according to their power without fraud and without delay What is this but an Association to defend the King and Kingdom against any Person whatever and by consequence to declare that the King for the time being is the only Rightful King Since his Person Crown and Dignity is to be preserved by all means in their Power This part of the Common-Law is affirmed by the Statute 11 H. 7. declaring it the Duty of Allegiance to defend the King and Land against every Power and Might and therefore as well against Pretenders to Title as others 2. This Act expresly indemnifies for voluntary Acts of Allegiance against the mind and will of the Prince 3. It can by no means have
been intended or implied by that Statute that there was or could be any other King besides the King for the time being For 1. To take it in that sense would be to make the Statute fight against it self and not only to admit that he were but a King not the King but to require the Subjects to fight for and against one and the same Person 4. H. 7. And his Parliament could not be thought to admit that he was an Usurper or a King contrary to Law or Right But H. 7. certainly intended to provide for the indempnity of those that should pay Allegiance to him as well as of those that should pay Allegiance to future Kings for the time being And indeed upon some of the Words it may seem doubtful whether the enacting part was intended to reach beyond his time and whether any other Sovereign Lord for the time being was intended but he who was at that time But if in relation to the King whose Parliament passed this Act the King for the time being was supposed to be the only Lawful and Rightful King it must be so taken in relation to all other Kings for the time being if either the enacting Part or the Preamble extend to ' em 5. If this Act should carry a plain implication that some other besides the King for the time being was the King of Right this would be so far from being for the Security of the King for the time being as must have been then intended as well as the indemnity of his Subjects that it must needs have the like effect with their Discourses who will have it that the present Government is not Rightful but yet that a sort of Allegiance is due to it because of God's Authority tho' contrary to Right Whenever these Men speak out it appears that they allow no Authority to the King for the time being but what is derived from the Tacit or implied Consent of their King of Right But this Jesuitism was not thought of at the making of that Statute 6. I desire to know what Person besides H. 7. was so much as imagined to be Rightful King or Queen of England when that Act was made However whether it can be thought that in the Judgment of that Parliament any Person besides H. 7. had Right to the Crown after a former Parliament had Ordained Established and Enacted that the Inheritance of the Crown of England and France should be stand and remain in King H. 7. and the Heirs of his Body and in no other Person That they held this Settlement to have been duely and righfully made and that without any relation to his marrying the supposed Heiress to the Crown appears by three other Acts of the same Parliament One of which attaints R. 3. for traiterously conspiring against their Sovereign Leige Lord H. 7. Another indempnifies Men for Trespass or taking Goods in maintenance of the Title of H. 7. for the time that his Banner was displaied against Richard late Duke of Gloucester Usurper of the Realm Another goes farther and indemnifies them who came from beyond-Sea with H. 7. or were in Sanctuary or Hidel for his Quarrel and Title and speaks of the Battle against his Enemies in recovering and obtaining his Just Title and Right to his Realm of England Wherein H. 7 ths Right and R. 3 ds Usurpation consisted shall afterwards be considered 7. When the Parliament 11 H. 7. speaks only of the King or Prince or Sovereign Lord for the time being without giving any discription whereby it should be known who is the Prince unless what relates particularly to H. 7. It must be presumed that no King is intended but he that was the Sovereign or Leige Lord in the Eye and Reputation of Law which as appears by the Case of R. 3. an Usurper continuing so was not then taken to be But who ever was in the Possession of the Throne without Usurpation was always lawful and rightful King 8. It cannot be thought the Parliament 11 H. 7. would have made an Act directly contrary to three others of the same Reign but they would have expresly repealed the former Acts or have offered some reason to palliate or colour their Proceedings to the contrary But take the Statute of 11 H. 7. in this Lawyers Sense only with an Exception that as to the Matter in Question it was a Declaratory Law as the words plainly shew and it will farther appear and it is evident that the Statutes against R. 3. and indemnifying them that acted for H. 7. before the displaying his Banner as well as after while R. 3. was in Possession of the Throne were contrary to this Lawyer 's Sense of the Statute 11 H. 7. according to which they who assisted H. 7. must have acted contrary to their Duty of Allegiance to the King for the time being Wherefore it plainly follows that R. 3. was not King for the time being according to the true meaning of the Statute 11 H. 7. and yet H. 6. who was of the younger House was in his time the only King for the time being in the Judgment of that very Parliament which supposes R. 3. not to have been so as appears by their reversing the Attainder of H. 6. and declaring the Act of Attainder to have been contrary to the Allegiance of the Subject against all right wiseness honour nature and duty inordinate seditious and slanderous and reversing the Attainders of others for their true and faithful Allegiance and Service to Hen. 6. and yet those Attainders were in a Parliament of a King by many supposed to be the only Person that had Right to be King and that after his being formally recognized by the States and then in Possession of the Power of the Kingdom Obj. But it may be objected if the Act 11 H. 7. was made only to indemnifie them that paid Allegiance to Rightful Kings there was no manner of need of it Answ 1. Many needless Statutes have been made in affirmance of the Common-Law out of abundant caution 2. It could not be needless to obviate mens fears upon pretences which might be set up against the King for the time being by removing the supposal that Allegiance could be due to any body else 3. The enacting part extends to indemnifie Men for what they out of Loyalty should do in time of War against the mind and will of the Prince for which the caution was but reasonable Effectually to prove that the Judgment of Hen. 7 ths Parliament That there could be but one Rightful King at a time except where they were Partners in Power is according to the fix'd and known Constitution of this Monarchy and that this manifests His present Majesty to be our only lawful and rightful Sovereign Lord and that the late King neither is nor of Right ought to be King I shall as briefly as well as I can give an Abstract of what will appear to any
incapacity from his Bastardy Besides his Wife Maud was descended from a Daughter of King Alfred married to Baldwin Earl of Flanders upon which account a Commentator on the Grand Custumary of Normandy held him to be the first or chief Heir Edward Son to Edmund Ironside was at one time designed by the Confessor for his Successor if he could prevail with the Nation to consent but that Edward dying before the Confessor his Son being a Minor seems never then to have been thought of Harold's design was covert nor does he appear to have been a Pretender till the Confessor lay upon his death-bed But Duke William had long been promis'd his Cousin King Edward's interest in order whereunto we may well believe he in the year 1651. came over to England and doubtless to ingratiate him to the Nation was by the Confessor carried up and down the Kingdom In the year 1657. or 1658. the design was brought to bear and in a Great Council of the whole Nation William was declared Successor or as the Law received by him has it agreeing with a Charter pass'd in Parl. 15. of his Reign was adopted Heir or as another Charter has it Edward instituted him adopted Heir That this Adoption or Institution of an Heir to the Crown was with a Consent truly National I shall elsewhere have occasion to prove at large at present shall only observe that the above-cited Law says that Edward caused the Kingdom to swear to William that Wilnot Earl Godwin's Son and Hacun his Grandson were sent Hostages to William to secure the future Allegiance of that Family that Robert Archbishiop of Canterbury and Harold were successively with the Duke to assure him of his being declared Heir to the Crown which Harold swore to endeavour to preserve to William But notwithstanding the Nations and his own Oath while the Nobility and People were at the Confessor's Funeral at Westminster Harold got a Party together at Lambeth where as some have it he set the Crown upon his own Head The mad Englishman as a contemporary Writer has it would not stay to see what the Publick Election would appoint Harold's Possession whatever it was prov'd very short lasting but nine Months nor was he ever fully recogniz'd or submitted to by the States or the Body of the Nation he never held any Parliament or Convention of the States which I take to be the reason that no Charter of his is to be seen nor have I met with any mention of one They who fought for him against William were judged Traytors and their Estates forfeited and it is rightly observ'd by the Lord Coke that in Demesday Harold who usurped the Crown of England after the decease of King Edward the Confessor is never named per nomen Regis sed per nomen Comitis Haroldi Wherefore he leaves him out of his Lift of our Kings William according to some Authors was encouraged to his attempt from the consideration that Harold was neither of the Saxon nor Danish Royal Stock When William Landed he claimed the Crown from his Cousins Gift with the consnt of the Nobility of the Kingdom confirmed by Oath and lays his qualification in being thought the most deserving of all that were nearly related to the Confessor Harold had nothing to plead against that but the suggestion that the Crown had not been setled by a Consent sufficiently formal that it was made without a Convention and Law of the Senate and People which 't is no wonder that he should pretend tho' there were never so formal an Election Notwithstanding the Right with which the Norman Duke Landed he proffered to submit to what the English should decree and therefore to a new election if they thought fit Upon Harold's death some of the English who dreaded the consequence of receiving William after a bloody Battle set up Edgar Atheling for King who tho' but the second degree from a Bastard and tho' his Father never had Possession was look'd upon as the true Heir of the Crown that is the Person of the last Regnant Branch of the Royal Family who ordinarily would have succeeded by common consent of the States if of sufficient Merit and reasons of State or other obligations did not interpose But the learned Monk Guitmond who could bot but know the constitution in this matter held him to be but one Heir among many of the Line of the Royal Family However the generallity of the Clergy thought themselves bound to maintain the Title with which King William Landed and that'twas Rebellion to oppose him yet before his being received for King he at Berkhamsted made a League or Contract with the People headed by the Great Earls Edwin and Morcar who came up with the Forces from the North which had never been in the Battle against the Duke Part of the League made with the People of England was that he should be Crown'd as the manner of the English Government requires at his Coronation the consent of the People was ask'd in the due and accustomed manner and the account Historians give of the Oath he then took shews it to be that which stood in the Saxon Ritual After which he more than once received and swore to that Body of the Common-Law of England which had obtain'd the name of King Edward's Laws which as has been observ'd declare the end for which a King is Constituted and that he loses the Name or ceases to be King when he answers not that end Indeed Dr. Brady who is as free with his Conquerors Memory as with the Liberties of England which he calls the Grants and Concessions of the King of this Nation will have it that William the I. regarded his Oath only in the beginning of his Reign and that by notorious violations of his contract with the People of England he acquired the Right of a Conqueror and thereby put an end to the ancient Constitution of this Monarchy and those Liberties and Priviledges of the Subject which manifestly appear to have been of elder date than the Monarchy Upon which if one would return the Freedom of his Censures against others it might be said that this was not only to make the then King the Successor of a Conqueror but with a prospect of applying the Rights which he ascribes to a supposed Qonquest to justifie what should be practised upon the late intended Conquest of this Nation That the Judgment and Practice of William the I. was very contrary to the Doctor 's Imaginations will be proved by numerous Instances and that it was so as to that part of the Constitution which concerns the Succession to the Crown appears by that King's Death-bed Declaration which some would set up for a will disposing of the Crown at that very time when he owns that it is not his to give
Heir to the Crown R. 2. following the example of E. 2. had the same fate of which the States of the Kingdom had some years before given him fair warning telling him they had an ancient Statute according to which they might with the common assent and consent of the People of the Realm abrogats him and advance somebody near of kin of the Royal Stock He not profiting by this admonition the States were some years after put to the exercice of their authority and having adjudged that he justly ought to be deposed the whole States appointed Commissioners for giving the Sentence of Deposition And a Record speaking of it says he was deposed for his demerits The Act of State for this says 't was as in like cases had been observed by the ancient custom of the Kingdom This being done Henry Duke of Lancuster as soon as the Kingdom was vacant rose out of his Seat and claim'd the Kingdom begin void His claim was al 's descandit be ryght lyne of the blode comeynge fro the gude Lord Henry therde The reason seems very plain why he claim'd from H. 3. his being the last inheritable blood which he could claim from not from R. 2. because deposed nor from E. 3. because of the forseiture of R. 2. declared or constituted his next Heir not from E. 2. because of his forfeiture nor from E. 1. becuase E. 2. had been his next Heir Hen. 4ths Descent from H. 3. was the qualification for an election This was not as has been supposed a strict right of Succession as he was the next Heir then appearing but he entituled himself to a preference before all other Descendants from that Blood as being a Deliverer of the Nation from Richard's tyranny he having with the help of his Kinsmen and Friends recovered the Kingdom which was upon the point of destruction through the defect of Government and violation of the Laws This induced the States and all the People unanimously to consent that Henry should fill the vacant Throne and they appointed all the Ceremonies of his Coronation But as far as proximity to the last King could infer a right he being Grandson to E. 3. had it before Mortimer descended from Lionel Duke of Clarence under whom the Family of York claim'd besides that H. 4. was undoubtedly the first on the Male line Tho' no Lay-man of knowledge and integrity can be thought at that time to have questioned those grounds upon which H. 4. was declared King yet since 't is hardly possible that there should be any Government which some will not be desirous to shake off as the Jews did the Theocrasy it can be no wonder that some would colour their ambition or malice under pretence of love to justice and that they should object want of right to disturb the most just and equal Government What was at the bottom of objections against H. 4ths Title will appear by the case of a true Head of the Church Militant Merk or Mark Bishop of Carlile who not being able as a Divine to make good his Argument against the receiving H. 4th for King was resolved to justifie it by dint of Sword after he was made King For in second of H. 4. he was indicted and tryed by a common Jury upon a special Commission for that he and other his Accomplices among which there were two bigotted Knights Blunt and Sely were leagued and confederated together with the Adversary and Enemy of England the French and thier Adherents traiterously to bring the said Adversary into the Land of England with intention to destroy the King and all his Leige People of the Kingdom and to new plant the Kingdom of England with our enemies of France that they in an hostile manner went up and down making great destruction and slaughter and without any Authority assuming to themselves Royal Power proclaim'd Richard to be King and that they would not suffer Henry to be their Lord or King To this Indictment the Bishop pleaded Church-Priviledge as an anointed Bishop which the Court over-ruled the the reason for which is very remarkable because the matters contained in the said Indictment concern the death of our Lord the King and the destruction of the whole Kingdom of England and consequently the manifest depression of the Church of England by which he claims to be priviledged all which is high and the greatest Treason and the Crime of laesa Majestas nor ought any man of right to pray in aid of the Law or to have it who commits such a Crime or intends to commit it c. His plea being thus over-ruled the Bishop pleaded not guilty but being convicted of the horrid matter contained in the Indictment it seems he did not think this a fit cause to die for and whether he merited a Pardon or no by sincere Repentance at least obtained one in which it is observable that he is called the late Bishop for this restitution to the Peace did not restore his Ecclesiastical Dignity He who is still called the late Bishop having a pardon sent him petitioned to be delivered out of Prison which was granted upon his finding Sureties for his good behaviour and four undertook that he should for the future behave himself well towards the King and his People Thus the fear of death reformed this stiff Prelate and made him engage to sit quietly under a Government which none but the Enemies to England and their Adherents endeavoured to subvert Still some were found calling themselves Englishmen who for the like ends with Merk would do their utmost to blemish H. 4ths Title this occasioned Oaths of Recognition thrice repeated 5o. of his Reign first at a Council of Worcester then at a Great Council at Westminster and after that in a full Parliament where the two former recognitions which were voluntary Associations were affirmed tho' as is there said there was no need of it By those Oaths they acknowledged the then King to be their Sovereign Leige Lord to obey him as their King and acknowledge the Prince his eldest Son as Heir apparent and inheritable to the Crown of England to him and the Heirs of his Body And for default of such Issue to his Brothers and their Issue successively and hereditably according to the Law of England to live and die against all People in the World The perjury of some and the doubts rais'd by others upon some of the expressions in the Act 5 H. 4. occasioned an other 7o. which by the Counsel and Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal to wit the Prelates Great Men Peers and Clergy and also at the earnest Petition of the Commons and by Authority of the said Parliament declares that the King 's eldest Son shall be and is and ought hereafter and now to be
true lawful and undoubted Heir and Universal Successor to the Crown and Kingdoms of England and France and all the King's Dominions whatsoever and wheresoever beyond the Sea and also has right of universally succeeding the King in the said Crown Kingdoms and Dominions To have to him and the Heirs Male of his Body and in default of such Issue so in remainder to his Brothers In an other Charter pass'd in that Parliament the Inheritance or Hereditation of the Crown is entail'd upon the King and the Heirs Male of his Body then to his four Sons and the Heirs Male of their Bodies successively It seems the next year some doubts arose upon these different Settlements that 5o. then remaining upon Record therefore they cancel and make void the Letters Patent of the Entail 5o. and change and amend that Settlement which they seem to have thought defective 1. In only declaring the Prince Heir Apparent and Inheritable to the Crown which was no more than to declare him before others qualified to succeed if the States should Elect him 2. In declaring him Inheritable only to the Crown of England without mentioning its appurtenances seeming to think that in Grants of this Nature nothing would pass by implication But to prevent all ambiguities they being as is said in that Record met in a Parliament according to the Custom of the Kingdom for divers Matters and Things concerning the King and his Kingdom The King with common Consent of the Kingdom Enacts That a new Patent be Sealed constituting Prince Henry Heir Apparent to succeed the King in his Crown Realms and Dominions to have them with all their appurtenances after the King's Decease to him and the Heirs of his Body and so in remainder to his three Brothers successively whereby they had a larger Estate than by the Entail 7º which was to Heirs Male Thus by Virtue of one or more Settlements by Authority of Parliament H. 5. succeeded and yet it was thought a great instance of the confidence the States had in him that in a Convention or Assembly holden according to Ancient Custom in which they treated about creating a new King some of the Nobility immediately Swore Allegiance to him before he had been declared King But it is to be observed that whereas his Father died the 20th of March he is said to be created King on the 5th of April Death cutting off the course of his Glories his Infant Son H. 6. came in under the Parliamentary Entail but the Administration was held to have fallen upon the States who accordingly after having declared H. 6. King in full Parliament pass'd a Patent constituting Humfry Duke of Gloster Protecter of the Realm John Duke of Bedford Regent of France and Henry Beaufort Bishop of Winchester and Thomas Beaufort Duke of Exeter Governors of the young Prince The Death of the brave Duke of Bedford occasioned not only the loss of France but the raising the Family of York to a pretence which in all probability had been buried to this day had not H. 6ths treacherous Ministers put him upon making Richard Duke of York Regent of France after being High Constable of England and Lieutenant of Ireland With these advantages Duke Richard set up under a Mask of Popularity as if he only sought redress of grievances while himself was the only National Calamity As nothing but success could give him any colour of Title he was forced to conceal his Ambition even from his own Party till 26 H. 6 yet after that acknowledged and swore to H. 6ths Right and confirm'd it with the Sacrament which Solemnities were to be subservient to his imaginary Divine Right Tho' by his Frauds and Perjuries he often came within the prospect of a Crown 38 H. 6. he was deservedly Attainted of High-Treason and an Association with an Oath was voluntarily enter'd into by the Lords wherein every one severally acknowledges H. 6. to be his most redoubted Lord and rightwish or Rightful by Succession born to Reign over him and all the Kings Liege People that he will do his utmost for the We le and surety of the King's Person of his most Royal Estats and the very conservation and continuance of his most high Authority Preheminence and Prerogative and for the preservation of the Queen and of Prince Edward his Right redoubted Lord the Prince that after the King's Death he will take and accept the Prince for his Sovereign Lord and after him the Issue of his Body lawfully begotten for want of such Issue any other Issue of the Body of the King that he will never give Aid Assistance or Favour to any thing contrary to the premises and that he will put himself in his due undelayed devoir with his Body Goods Might Power Counsel and Advertisement to resist withstand and subdue all that should presume to do contrary to the premises or any of them This Association not being General throughout the Kingdom had no great effect not so much from any belief the Nation had of Richard's being injured as from the burdens a Treacherous Ministry induced a weak Prince to lay upon the Subjects This made the Commons of Kent invite over from abroad the Duke and his Party who had fled from Justice then the Tide turn'd and the King became wholly in the power of the Duke of York under whose awe and influence a Parliament was call'd where he laid claim to the Crown with circumstances which one would think were enough to give any Man a face of Title and yet his pretended Divine Right countenanc'd by Providence was mightily qualify'd by the courage of the Parliament and their regard to the Constitution of this Monarchy His claim was as Son to Ann Daughter to Roger Mortimer Son and Heir to Philippa Daughter and Heir to Lionel Duke of Clarence third Son to E. 3. whereas H. 6. descended from John of Gaunt the 4th and eldest surviving Son After Debate among the Lords upon this matter these Objections were agreed upon against Richard's pretence of Title 1. The Oaths they had taken to the King their Sovereign Lord. 2. Acts of Parliament made in divers Parliaments of the King's Progenitors of Authority sufficient to defeat any manner of Title to be made to any Person 3. Several Entails made to Heirs Male 4. That Richard did not bear Lionel's Arms. 5. That H. 4. took upon him the Crown not as Conqueror but right Inheritor to H 3. All that is urged materially against this for Richard is 1. That Oaths do not bind against God's Law and that requires Truth and Justice to be maintain'd but this being a Spiritual matter he refers to any Judge Spiritual 2. That there was but one Entail of the Crown 7 H. 4. but that this was void against the right Inheritor of the Crown according to God's law and all Natural laws 3. It could
be justify'd by Record that H. 4ths saying was not true Upon which 't is observable 1. That Richard's answer goes upon a manifest begging the Question and supposing that he had a Right which could not be barred by Act of Parliament 2. That the Lords having mentioned several Entails upon Heirs Male we are to believe that there was then upon Record the Entail upon Heirs Male in the time of E. 3. pleaded by Judge Fortescue in defence of the Title of his King H. 6. This we are the rather to believe because there was but one Entail upon Heirs male in H. 4ths reign nor is Richard's denial any argument against this it appearing that he thought it sufficient for him to affirm any thing and this was to pass for Truth and Law Thus he denies that there had been any Entail but 7º H. 4. forgetting that which had been made 5º and was amended 8 H. 4. and so very much did he mistake that he supposed the Entail 7º to be upon the Heirs of the Body when it was upon Heirs male of the Body 3. What the Lords say of Richard's not bearing Lionel's Arms confirms another objection against him made by Judge Fortescue from the Barstardy of Philippa born while Lionel was beyond the four Seas and never own'd by him nor did she or her descendants till the time of this claim bear the Arms of that Family 4. Richard's Right of Descent admitting there had been no Illegitimacy is laid as a Right in Nature but either this must be as the Laws of the Land guide the course of Nature or otherwise we must go back in search of this Right if not as far as Adam yet to some descendant from the eldest House of the Saxon Royal Family to such at least as could derive their Pedigree from some House elder than King Alfred's which may be done at this day Besides if we should look back to a Right in Nature all the Kings descendants from H. 2. from whom Duke Richard came as well as H. 6. must have been Usurpers H. 2ds Children having being begotten on another Man's Wife who had been Divorced for her Adultery and therefore by God's Law could not Marry again nor does it appear that the Divorce was from the Contract Or if this Matter should admit of Debate such of our Kings as descended from an other common Ancestor King John must have been Usurpers not only by reasonof John's suppos'd Usurpation upon Arthur of Brittain and his Sister but in that his Children were begotten on an other Man's Wife who does not seem ever to have been divorced and besides according to the Law of Nature it would seem that John had a former Wife in being For he was divorced from her only for their being third Cousins as H. 2 ds Wife was from her first Husband as they were Cousins in the 4 th Degree If the first Marriages in both cases were void or voidable it could have been only by the Laws of the Romish Church but if those Laws shall make a natural right by governing the course of descents much more shall the Laws of particular Countries If by the Law of Nature Duke Richard meant that which the consent of Nations has made to pass for the dictates of nature according to Cujacius this Law of Nature is for the right of Proximity which John of Gaunt from whom H. 6. descended had to his Father before R. 2. and H. 4 John of Gaunt's Son had before the Son of Lionel's Daughter supposing her legitimate And by that Law it should seem that Males are ordinarily to be preferred before Females tho' their Vertues have often rais'd 'em to Empire Farther yet if by this he meant the Law of reasonable nature what shadow of reason can be assigned why the eldest Issue of a King 's eldest Child whether that Issue be an Infant or void of understanding or humanity ought universally to succeed to Crowns before the King 's eldest surviving Son whatever be his Merits or the exigencies of the Publick And why should not a moral incapacity in this sense be a natural one But if the Great Lawyer Fortescue who as may be seen by the Rolls of the King's Bench was Chief Justice there from before Richard pretended to the Crown and to the end of H. 6 ths Reign may be allowed to speak the Sense of the Learned in that Time they held the Power of the Prince to flow or be derived from the People according to which it must have been taken to be more according to natural right that the People who appointed the Succession in any Family should govern and vary it as they saw occasion than that from their pitching upon a Person or Family they should be for ever debarred from doing justice to the demerits of one and to the merits of another in that very Family I am sure the learned Grotius who distinguishes lineal Succession from Hereditary says an Hereditary Kingdom is one which was made so by the Peoples free consent And in such Kingdoms he supposes several Rules of Succession by guessing at or presuming the will of the People If Duke Richard would have admitted the Law of the Land to govern the course of Descents and Successions to the Crown then 't is evident beyond contradiction that H. 6. came in by a legal and natural course of Descent and however according to laudable custom from the beginning of this Monarchy Acts of Parliament may alter that course However the timerous Lords without concurrence in that matter of the stouter Commons agreed that the Duke's Title could not be defeated and yet thought not themselves discharged from their Oaths to H. 6. unless he would consent to the mean or expedient they found out which was for the King to keep his Estate and Dignity Royal during his life and the Duke and his Heirs to succeed him in the same To this both the King and Duke consented but neither the King 's Right to the Possession nor the Duke 's to the reversion arose from their private agreement but from the Authority of Parliament according to which the King had as much right to the Possession as the Duke to the reversion And it remains as the judgment even of that Parliament whatever force or awe were over it that Richard Duke of York had no right to the Possession and neither was King nor of right ought to be King till H. 6. should die or cease to be King Nay even E. 4 ths Judges owned that H. 6. was not a meer Usurper because the Crown was entailed to him by Parliament As a just judgment upon Richard's pretence of Title contrary not only to the National but Divine Authority giving sanction to the Laws of the Kingdom and his own Oaths he died within sight of the Promised Land But soon after
come without a manifest departure from their avowed Principles and therefore to keep to them they must give up the only colourable Authority for their notion of King de jure and de facto And they must yield that there is not the least shadow of pretence from what was held in those times that there was a King of right at the very time that an other was in fact it going no farther than that the Person who was King ought not to have been King but while he was King the other was none 7. The judgment of E. 4 ths first Parliament whatever hard names they gave that Family on which they trampled was so far from being an Authority as has been pretended against the receiving his present Majesty upon the late King's breach of the Original or Common-Law Contract confirmed by several declaratory Statutes of the Kingdom and the solemn Oaths of our Kings that it is express for the eviction and amotion of one King upon his breach of a contract establish'd in Parliament and the setting up an other by an election And it is observable that the Act 1º E. 4. which confirms several judicial and other Acts of such as it calls Kings only in fact says other than by Authority of any Parliament holden in their times plainly admitting that Authority to be sufficient in it self H. 6. coming again into Power because of a Possession with such a consent of the People as made E. 4. King was formally again elected at the Tower and in H. 7 ths time was adjudged to have had his attainder purged by his re-adeption of Power which seems not to have been till he had been re-elected Then H. 6. calls a Parliament where he in his turn attaints the Adherents of E. 4. and as we are to believe himself but the Record of that having been cancelled and the Rolls loss'd it appears not whether it was for any Act committed before H. 6 ths re-adeption of Power The Tide again turning for E. 4. all the Acts of that Parliament are reversed and declared or made void from the time that he had been declared he was held to have continued the Possession of the Regal Dignity tho' with-held from the exercice of the Power and therefore H. 6. from the first admission of E. 4. to the Crown was accounted no King and his Parliament to be but a pretenced Parliament E. 4 ths usage of H. 6. was repaid to his Sons by their Uncle R. 3. some will have it that he made them away as indeed is intimated in the Act attainting R. 3. but 't is certain that they were bastardized in a Convention whose Acts were by Parliament after Richard was admitted King declared for truth and not to be doubted and there are Authorities to induce the Belief that Edward's Sons were really Bastards by reason of the Father's pre-contract however the Convention declared that they were not fit to Reign because they were Infants and their Mother ignoble and married clandestinely without the knowing and assent of the Lords George Duke of Clarence the next Brother to E. 4. having been attainted in a Parliament of E. 4. they having singular confidence in Richard's particular merit have chosen in all that in them is and by that their certain writing choose him their King and Sovereign Lord to whom they know of certain it appertaineth of Inheritance to be chosen And observing that tho' the Learned in the Laws and Customs know his Title to be good the most part of the People is not sufficiently learned in the Laws and Customs they declare that the Court of Parliament is of such Authority and the People of this Land of such a disposition as experience teacheth that Manifestation and Declaration of any Truth or Right made by the three States of the Realm assembled in Parliament and by Authority of the same maketh before all other things most faith and certain quieting of mens minds and removing the occasion of doubts and seditious language Therefore by the Authority of that Parliament it is pronounced and declared that their Sovereign Lord the King was and is the very undoubted King as well by right of Consanguinity and Inheritance as by lawful Election Consecration and Coronation And they Enact Establish Pronounce Decree and Declare Edward the King 's eldest Son Heir Apparent to him and his Heirs of his Body Any Man who compares that Act at large with the former Presidents must see that it was penn'd with great Wisdom and regard to the Constitution of the Monarchy And tho' out of an usual complement to the prevailing side R. 3. has generally been represented as a Monster in Person and Nature the learned Buck has made it doubtful which was the most deserving in all things R. 3. or H. 7. Certain it is that tho' the Crown had by Authority of Parliament been settled in remainder after H. 6. upon Duke Richard and his Heirs and that Duke's Grand-daughter was alive and marriageable in the Reign of R. 3. her suppos'd Right gave him no disturbance and his Possession was very quiet till he disobliged the Duke of Bucks who was the great Instrument in setting him up by rejecting his Claim to be High-Constable of England which was an Authority dangerous to be trusted in the hands of so popular a Man nor could the Duke and his Faction expect to succeed in their conspiracy without the support of French Forces and accordingly applied themselves to Henry Earl of Richmond afterwards H. 7. with whom the Duke of Brittany had for some years kept even E. 4. in awe Henry was glad of the opportunity and to strengthen his Interest agrees with some of his Party to marry the Daughter of E. 4. but was far from making any claim in her right It is very probable that one of E. 4 ths Sons was then alive be that as it will as appears by the Statutes 1 H. 7. cited above his Parliament held that he landed with Title and R. 3. being deserted and slain in the Field of Battle that opposition to Henry was by Authority of Parliament adjudged Treason against the Sovereign Lord of this Land and H. 7 th was held to have recovered his right After this when H. 7. meets his first Parliament he with his own Mouth tells the Commons in full Parliament that his accession to the Right and Crown of England was as well by just Title of Inheritance as by God's true judgment in giving him the victory over his enemy in the Field In which bating the Settlement in the time of the Confessor H. 7. claim'd as W. 1. did by the Inheritance of consanguinity and that Success which gave him the preference before others of the same Blood especially since that enemy whom he subdued was held to be an Usurper This 't is evident that he was accounted before H. 7. Landed But if
it be truly considered his Usurpation if any must have consisted in the Tyrannical Exercice of his Power which the Duke of Bucks had urged to justify his Arms and not from the assuming it and that H. 7 th's Sovereignty was founded in that election of the Body of the People without a formal Convention which pitch'd upon him as a fit Person to deliver them from their real or imagin'd Yoke This will appear beyond contradiction from the proceedings of the Parliament upon his Claim and the moral impossibility of giving it any other colour However the Parliament took to it self full Authority in the matter and declaring their hopes that it might be to the pleasure of Almighty God the Wealth Prosperity and Security of this Realm by Authority of Parliament settles the Crown upon H. 7. and the Heirs of his Body exclusive of all others After which indeed they desire him to marry Eliz. E. 4th's Daughter that by God's Grace there might be issue of the Stock of their Kings but then special care is taken that neither the King or the Children by that marriage should be thought to derive any Title from her for tho' they by Authority of Parliament repeal her Bastardy declared 1º R. 3. they by the said Authority ordein that the then Act ne eny clause in the same be hurtful or prejudicial to the Act of stablishment of the Crown of England to the King and the Heirs of his Body begotten After this H. 7. obtains a Bull from the Pope which says the Kingdom belonged to him not only by right of War and notorious undoubted nearest Title of Succession but also by the election of the Prelates Peers Great Men Nobles and the Commons of all the Kingdom of England and by the known and decreed Statute and Ordinance of the three States of the said Kingdom of England in their Convention called a Parliament According to this tho' his Reign was held to have begun before he had been declared King it was as I shall have occasion to observe in other cases only by way of relation to that solemn Investiture without which he had never been King That his Right must have been derived from a plain Election is very evident for 1. He had been attainted in a Parliament of R. 3. and if the Royal Blood could not be so attainted but whenever a former King ceased to be King the Person so attainted standing next to the Crown should have his Attainder purged by the descent of the Crown then according to them of this Opinion the Earl of Warwick Son to George Duke of Clarence who had been attainted by Parliament in the Reign of his Brother E. 4. must have had the Right before H. 7. And yet if we regard the distinction between Proximity and Representation H. 7. was in that respect more truly the next Heir to the Crown But however the resolution of the Judges 1 H. 7. has been taken they held the disability to cease eo facto that he took upon him the Royal Dignity to be King nor by any imagined Right of Descent 2. At least one of the Children of E. 4. was alive when H. 7. came to the Crown 3. Tho' in truth it appears by the Statute reversing the Attainder of H. 6. to have been the judgment of H. 7th's Parliament that H. 6ths Family of which he was ought to be the reigning Family yet H. 7. had no pretence to preference in that Family but from his Merits and the People's Choice For 1. His own Mother who stood before him upon that Line was then alive 2. He came from a Bastard branch his Ancestor being the Bastard Son of John of Gaunt during former Marriages on both sides And tho' there was a legitimation 20 R. 2. that neither did nor was intended to extend to capacitate for the Royal Dignity However H. 7. is in an Act of Parliament called Natural Sovereign Leige Lord. Certain it is that he was never in his time or after Authoritatively declared or accounted King only in Fact and they who will take the distinction of King in Right and in Fact from the last Parliamentary Declaration in this matter before the Revolution must hold that till the restitution of the younger House which had been settled the Regnant Family for three Reigns successively all the Kings of the elder House were Kings only in Fact but not of Right And yet it is not to be thence inferred that while they of the elder House had possession they were to be accounted Usurpers for not standing first upon that Line which ought to have had the preference But when any Prince of either branch had Justice done to his Merits who would not say that he ought sooner to have been King H. 8th came in under the Authority of Parliament which had made H. 7th the Head of a new Succession as the Crown had been Entail'd upon him and his Issue And tho' H. 8th's Mother was Daughter to E. 4. whatever Dr. Brady suggests it has appeared above that particular care was taken by H. 7th's Parliament that the Crown should not be thought to descend by proximity of Blood but that the Right of Succession was to be derived from Parliamentary Authority It is beyond contradiction that in the judgment of H. 8th and his Parliaments the inheritance of the Crown was variable as Parliaments should determine and that no Man could rightfully succeed without such appointment By Authority of his Paliament 25o. the Marriage with Katherine Mother to Queen Mary was declared void and that with Ann Mother to Queen Elizabeth lawful and the Children made inheritable according to the course of Inhetances and laws of this Realm first to Males then to Females 't was made High-Treason by Writing Print Deed or Act to attempt any thing to the prejudice of that Settlement and the substance of an Oath was appointed afterwards made more express by another Statute repealing all Oaths to the contrary and engaging the Subjects in maintaining that Act of Succession to do against all manner of Persons of what estate degree or condition soever he be By Authority of Parliament 28 H. 8. the Marriages with Queen Katharine and Queen Ann are declared unlawful and the Children illegitimate and the Crown is settled upon the issue of the Body of Queen Jane E. 6ths Mother for want of such issue to such Person and Persons as the King should appoint by Virtue of the said Act. And it provides that if any should attempt to succeed contrary to that Settlement they should lose and forfeit all right Title and Interest that they may claim to the Crown as Heirs by Descent or otherwise The reason for reserving an appointment to the King is very remarkable because as the words of the Statute are If such Heirs should fail as God defend and no Provision made in your life who should
rule and govern this Realm for lack of such Heirs then this Realm after your transitory life shall be destitute of a lawful Governor or else per case encumbred with such a Person that would covet to aspire to the same whom the Subjects of this Realm shall not find in their hearts to love dread and obediently serve as their Sovereign Lord. And all offenders against that Act their Abetters Maintainers Fautors Counsellors and Aiders were to be deemed and adjudged High Traytors to the Realm According to which it is very evident 1. That no Person would have had Right to succeed who was not within the express limitations then made or the future Provision by Virtue of the Authority of that Parliament 2. If any Person should aspire to succeed from a pretended Right of Proximity or the Settlement 1 H. 7. he would have been an Incumberer or Usurper of the Realm unless the Subjects should find in their Hearts or freely Consent to serve him as their Sovereign Lord that is till he should be elected King 3. That till the election of another King there would be a vacancy and whoever would pretend to be King till Elected was punishable as a Traytor to the Realm By Authority of the same Parliament the Illegitimations of Mary and Elizabeth are continued yet if the King and Prince Edward should die without Heirs of their Bodies the Crown was to go to the two Ladies successively but their respective interests to determine if they did not perform such Conditions as the King should appoint And in case of failure of Issue or in performance of the Conditions least the Realm should be destitute of a lawful Governor the Crown was to go as the King should appoint in such manner as is there directed The Settlement by Authority of Parliament 28 H. 8. was by the same Authority confirmed in substance 35º with a repetition of the inducement to place in the King a Power to appoint a Successor But whoever should have been so appointed or for want of such appointment elected by the Estates upon a vacancy according to a Statute 25 H. 8. and that above cited 1 H. 7. would have become a natural Lord. That what I have observed in Acts of Parliament in the time of H. 8. proceeded not from the prevalence of any Party or compliance with the King's humour but was the settled Judgment of the Learned of those times how much soever divided in other matters may appear by some passages between the Learned Sir Thomas Moore who had been Chancellor and Ryche then Solicitor General Sir Thomas being a Prisoner in the Tower for not owning the King's Supremacy Ryche to perswade him to comply used this argument If says he it should be enacted by Authority of Parliament that I should be King and that if any one should deny it it should be Treason would you say that I were not King For certain adds he in my conscience this would be no offence but you would be obliged to say so and to take me for King because your own consent was bound by the Act of Parliament Sir Thomas Answers it would be an offence if he should say he were not King because he should be bound by the Act for that he might give his consent to that matter This he said was a light case But what if a Parliament should enact That God should not be God Ryche replies It was impossible God should not be God But says he because your case from God is sublime I will propose to you this of an inferior Nature You know our King is constituted Supream Head on Earth of the Church of England and why ought not you Master Moore so to affirm and take him as well as in the case above of my being made King In which case you grant that you would be obliged to affirm and take me to be King Moore says these were not like cases because a King may be made by Parliament and may be deprived by Parliament to which Act every Subject being present in Parliament may give his consent But to the case of the Primacy he cannot be obliged because to that he cannot give his consent in Parliament c. And it is observable that tho' this is set forth in the Indictment against Sir Thomas Moore it is only used as proof of his denying the Supremacy without any aggravation from what he says of the Power of a Parliament in the present Question E. 6. succeded H. 8. according to Parliamentary Settlements without any formal recognition Nor was Mary his half Sister who succeeded him recognized but her Parliament thought it for her Honour to take off her illegitimation tho' that was not necessary to give her a Right to the Crown nor did that Parliament use any expressions whereby they might seem to think so When she came to marry Philip King of Spain they fully asserted their rightful Power all the marriage Articles being settled by Authority of Parliament By that Philip is made an English King Another Parliament makes it forfeiture of Goods and Chattels and perpetual Imprisonment the first time and High-Treason the second after a former Conviction maliciously to maintain that either of them ought not to enjoy the Stile Honour and Kingly Name Her Right was founded upon the express limitation to her by Authority of Parliament and her Husband 's not in marrying her but the consent of Parliament Upon the same Right her half Sister Elizabeth succeeded her By that good Providence which so often appear'd for her Mary dying while a Parliament was sitting The States with general consent decreed Elizabeth to be proclaimed true and lawful Heir to the Crown according to the Act of Succession 35 H. 8. And in the Act of Recognition she is declared their rightful and lawful Sovereign Leige Lady and Queen Soon after this in a Letter written with her own hand to Ferdinand the Emperor she tells him that she by God's goodness succeeded her Sister by right of Inheritance and consent of her Subjects Tho' she had sufficient opportunity to have procured an Act of Parliament to take off her illegitimacy she seemed with wisdom to decline it 1. Because the Authority of Parliament under which she claimed was more generally acknowledged in those days in relation to the Succession of the Crown than in voiding or confirming Marriages which has been held a Spiritual Matter 2. To admit that she owed her Crown wholly to the Authority of Parliament could not but be more popular than to pretend to it by right of Blood In the 8 th and 9 th of her Reign the Lords addressed to her that a Successor might be appointed in Parliament least God should call the Queen without certainty of Succession and affirm that the not granting their request would leave the Realm without Government In the 13 th of her Reign it is made
a Settlement made in the Ancestor's life time it will not be so where there has been none as was the case of C. 2. 3. If one should in the eye of Law be King immediately upon the death of an other it would not follow that this would be by a strict right of descent but that after the being admitted King there should be a relation backwards to prevent the loss of any rights belonging to the Crown and thus it was plainly taken by the Chief Justices Dyer and Anderson who say that the King who is Heir or Successor may write and begin his Reign the same day that his Progenitor or Predecessor died And agreeably to this it was the resolution of all the Judges of the King's Bench in Elizabeth's time that a saving to a King and his Heirs shall go to a Successor of the Crown tho' not Heir to that King That J. 2. made too great haste to succeed his Brother C. 2. now at least Men will be apt to believe of whom I shall observe only in short 1. That he was within no Parliamentary Settlement of the Crown then in force 2. The best pretence J. 2. had of coming to the Crown without an immediate election must have been the Settlement 1º H. 7. But no shadow of reason can be assigned why the late Act of Settlement was not as rightful and with as true Authority as that 1º H. 7. 3. J. 2. being reconciled to the Sea of Rome which is High Treason by our Law and for which he had been convicted in his Brother's time if the Indictment had not been arbitrarily defeated was as much disabled from succeeding to the Crown as the Family of George Duke of Clarence by reason of that Duke's attainder 4. Admit the assuming the Royal Dignity had purged the former disability the continuing a Papist was a constant incapacity to be the Head of this Protestant Church and Kingdom rendring it impracticable for him to answer the end for which our Kings had been constituted 5. He was never duely invested with the Royal Dignity not having taken the appointed Coronation-Oath which for his sake was traiterously altered with an omission of the Rights of the People and an unjustifiable Salvo for Prerogative Nor was he ever fully recognized 6. By seizing the Customs and raising Taxes without Authority of Parliament dispensing with the Laws of the Kingdom raising and keeping a standing Army in the time of Peace and the like enormities he violated that constitution which should have made or kept him King and if he ever was King more than Harold the Son of Earl Godwin manifestly ceased to be King before his abdication 7. However it may have been at his first leaving the Kingdom without any other Government than what according to ancient Custom fell upon the States of the Kingdom he having since discovered a settled intention to destroy the People of England or the greater part of 'em by a Foreign Power with their Party here according to those Casuists who are most favourable to such rights as he has claimed from the time at least of his manifesting such intention he ceased to be King and His present Majesty having been regularly declared King the other is totally barred from all claim and colour of pretence How great a noise soever some make for him since his flight after their deseting him the greatest sticklers for his suppos'd rightful Authority being disappointed of their sanguine expectations warmly opposed his exercice of those rights to which their servillity had encouraged him the very Bishops who for his sake have set up for heads under him of a separate Church not only disobeyed his positive commands in matters which at other times at least in things of the like nature they would have contended to belong to his Headship of the Church but they would have limited his Power little less than the 19 Propositions to C. 1. which they had long seem'd to abhor Some of their Party if not themselves joyn'd in solliciting his present Majesty to undertake our Deliverance and a certain Person who would be thought never to have departed from their Principles is said to have gone so far as to sign the invitation tho' upon second thoughts he desired to have his name scratch'd out The Bishops being required to sign an abhorrence of that enterprize absolutely refused it Their Archbishop was one of them who petitioned his present Majesty to take the Government upon him before the late King left England and Non-assistance to their jure Divino King was become as Catholick Doctrine as Non-resistance During this time the designs of the Party were kept secret but the People began to hope well of the Body of the English Clergy believing them by a wonderful providence to be reformed in their Principles of Government with which they had brought a scandal upon the Reformation But the Convention meeting to provide for the Peace and Settlement of the Nation it then appear'd that the mighty Zealots for the Monarchy were only for setting up themselves and in truth would have no Sovereignty but in the Church as they called their Faction for as they would not have his present Majesty to be King but a Regent or Officer for the interim till the late King should come to their terms neither did they truly own him for their King whom they neither would assist as Subjects nor consult in choosing a new Government However the Throne having according to former Presidents and the plain right of the Kingdom been declared vacant upon King's breach of the original contracts and abdication the Lords and Commons reciting many particulars of his misgovernment resolve that William and Mary Prince and Princess of Orange be and be declared King and Queen and make a farther Settlement of the Crown They having accepted the Crown the Lords and Commons together with the Mayor and Citizens of London and others of the Commons of this Realm with full consent publish and proclaim William and Mary Prince and Princess of Orange to be King and Queen of England France and Ireland and in the Proclamation own a miraculous deliverance from Popery and Arbitrary Power and that our preservation is due next under God to the resolution and conduct of His Highness the Prince of Orange whom God hath chosen to be the Glorious Instrument of an inestimable Happiness to us and our Posterity A Parliament called soon after declares and enacts that they do recognize and acknowledge that Their Majesties are and of Right ought to be by the Laws of this Realm their Sovereign Liege Lord and Lady King and Queen of England c. in and to whose Princely Persons the Royal State Crown and Dignity of the said Realms with all Honours Prerogatives c. are fully rightfully and entirely Invested Incorporated United and Annexed Notwithstanding which many who have sworn to bear Faith
and true Allegiance to King William will be wiser than the Law not only declared by this Act of Parliament but by several in former Reigns and with a gross Jesuitical evasion without any colour of foundation in Law or Reason pretend that they have sworn to K. William only as King in Fact but that another was rightful King at the same time This groundless and wicked distinction appears to have engaged some Men in an horrid and barbarous Plot against his Majesty's Person and Government tho' they had sworn to be true and faithful to him and it seems by the case of Sir John Perkins that neither he nor his Casuists thought the Oath to King William any departure from the Allegiance to King James nor the design of Assassinating King William any breach of the Oath to him Since therefore the deceit has taken rise from the supposition that the late King continues King of Right together with the general terms of the Oath which are pretended to leave a latitude for this illegal and nonsensical supposition and an Oath more explicit has been artfully kept off a voluntary Declaration that his present Majesty King William is Rightful and Lawful King of these Realms as it is fully warranted by the fundamental constitution of this Government is at this time become a necessary duty when it is evident to the World what they who are of a contrary Opinion will act as they have opportunity But to engage to stand by and assist each other in the defence of His Majesty's Person and Government is not more a consequence of the declaring him rightful and lawful King than it is implied in the Oath of Allegiance appointed by the Act of Parliament which settles the Crown and however the Common-Law Oath and the legal sense of Allegiance manifestly require it If any who have taken the Oath of Allegiance to his present Majesty scruple to associate because of the declaring His Majesty to be rightful and lawful King it is evident that they prevaricated when they swore If they questioned the legality of entring into this before there was a positive Law for it 't is certain they have been little acquainted with the Common-Law Oath of Allegiance and the warrantable Presidents of former times according to which the late Act late Act which enjoyns some to Sign the Association not only gives it Sanction for the future but with express relation to its being voluntarily enter'd into by great numbers of His Majesty's Subjects declares that it is good and lawful And any Man who impartially weighs what I have laid together from Records and other Authentick Memorials of pass'd times must own that it is with full and indubitable Authority enacted That if any person or persons shall maliciously by Writing Printing Preaching Teaching or advised speaking utter publish or declare that His present Majesty is not the lawful and rightful King of these Realms or that the late King James or the pretended Prince of Wales hath any Right or Title to the Crown of these Realms or that any other person or persons hath or have any right or title to the same otherwise than according to an Act of Parliament made in the first year of the Reign of His present Majesty and the late Queen Intituled An Act declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and settling the Succession of the Crown such person or persons being thereof lawfully Convicted shall incur the danger and penalty of Praemunire To imagine that after all this the late King either is or ought to be King is to flight all Authorities Ancient as well as Modern Which leads me to the Nature of our Lawyer 's offence who before the Act for the Security of His Majesty's Person and Government held the Signing the Association to be an Overt-Act of Treason against the King de Jure which as has appeared above tends manifestly to depose and unking His present Majesty as in the Eye of the Law there is but one King and he is the only King de Jure Besides this Gentleman admits That by the Statute 11 H. 7. Allegiance is due to a King in Fact and that the Oath of Allegiance was to be taken to him nor can pretend that there ever till of late was any other Oath but what expresly obliged to the Defence of the King and Kingdom against all Men therefore in consequence of his own Notion he must grant that to contend that there may be Treason against any other but the King for the time being is to suppose two contrary Allegiances and therein to depart from that Allegiance which was due even by his own interpretation of the Statute 11 H. 7. But it being evident that by that Statute and the whole course of the Common Law there is but one King I need not tell him the Crime of publishing a written Opinion manifestly importing an endeavour to Depose him If this had been delivered only in Words it is well known who used his Oratory to make words alone Treason within the Statute 25 E. 3. for which I may refer him to the Trial of the now Earl of Macclesfield in the beginning of the late King's Reign and to the Author of the Magistracy and Government Vindicated But as the Opinion was written he may well know from what late Authority Soribere est agere is become a Maxim or Proverbial Nor can he deny the Words to be within the reason of what the Court held in Flower 's Case of a Man's affirming the King to be a Bastard or that another had better Tittle to the Crown because it may draw the Subjects from their Allegiance and beget Mutiny in the Realm or Owen's Case of declaring it Lawful to kill the King being Excommunicated by the Pope both which not to mention more of the like kind were adjudged High-Treason According to the Print of the later Case it would seem that Words alone made the Treason ' but it appears by a MS. Report of one who had been Attorney General and afterwards Chief Justice of the Common-Pleas that Owen's Subscribing his Confession of what he had publickly declared was given in Evidence as the Overt-Act But if any Lawyer who has labour'd to make Treason of Words alone or Writing alone without Publication or Signing an Association to defend the King for the time being against one who had been King but is not should appear not only to have Written or Signed the Opinion above after a Discourse shewing to what Persons it related but to have publish'd this and to have Solicited Men not to Subscribe the Association upon those or the like topicks should he be Convicted of High-Treason against our Sovereign Lord the King it would be difficult not to apply that of the Poet Nec lex est justior ulla Quam necis artifices arte perire suâ None can the Justice of that Law deny By which who strain'd it against others dye FINIS The
declaring that he would not then wear his Crown and dispensing with the Services of the Citizens of London and others * Mat. Par. Ipsi de communi conc totius regni ipsum cum iniquis corsiliariis suis a regno depellerent de novo Rege creando tractarent a Bracton lib. 2. c. 16. Rex autem habet superiorem Deum item Legem per quam factus est Rex item Curiam suam c. Vid. etiam ib. c. 24. l. 3. c. 9. b Lib. de Antiq. Leg. in Arch. Civ c Lib. de Antiq Leg. in Archiv Civ Lon. An. 1260. 44 H. 3. L. 55. H. 3. post ejus decessum rectis haeredibus coronae Angliae d Mat. West Gilbertus Johes Comites nec non Clerus populus ad magnum altare ecc Westm celeriter properaunt Ed. prim Regis fidel jurantes e Annales Wav f. 227. Facta convocatione omnium Prel c. a Rot. claus 1. E. 1. m. 11. b Walsing f. 1. c Mat. West f. 430. 25 E. 1. d Suscipiatis me quod si non rediero in Regem vestrum filium meum coronetis e Mirror p. 8. f Wals. f. 68. Non tam jure haereditario c. g Wals. f. 107. Rex dignitate regali abdicatur filius substituitur h Knighton col 2550. Post multos ejulatus c. i Rot. Claus 1 E. 3. m. 28. a Bib. Cot. Cleop. D. 9. Annales de Gestis Britcnum De. An. 1326. Convocatum est concilium generals c. b In Regem Angliae est sublimatus c Stat. 1. E. 3. Rastal a Rot. Parl. 50. E. 3. b Began his reign An. 1377. c Knighton f. 2683. Propinquiorem aliquem de stir pe regid d 23 R. 2. e Rot. Parl. 1. H. 4. n. 16. f N. 52. g Rot. serv die Coron H. 4. h Rot. Parl. 1. H. 4. i Rot. Parl. 1 H. 4. n. 54. so Welsing k Rot. Parl. sup Tpod. Neust f. 156. Regnum Angliae sic vacans l Vid. The Debate at large p. 127. m Walsing sup Rot. Parl. n Rot. Parl. n. 54. Iiden Status cum tote populo absque quacunque difficultate vel mâ—râ ut Dux praefatus super eos regnaret unanimiter consenserunt a Rot. Servic sup b Vid. inf the case of Bishop Merk c Rot. Pat. 2 H. 4. rot 4. d Interliga confederati adversario inimiâ—o nri Regis rni sui de Erancia adherentibus ad eundem adversar c. e Nota Richard's name was used only to colour the inviting the French to over-run this hand f Quod ipse Epus unctus 〈◊〉 a Nota Et consequenter eccles Anglicanae per quam c. b Pardonae vimus eidem nuper Episcope sectam pacis c. c Quod ipse amodo se bene geret erga Dominum Regem populum d This recited in the Petitions of the Commons Rot. Pat. 8 H. 4. p. 1. m. 4. e D'un volunt d'un assentcoment quil nen busoignoit my affermerent f Enheretablement a Pur viver morer encontre touts les gents de monde b Rot. Pat. 7. H. 4. pars 2. in 23. Ad ammovendam penitus materiam disceptationis c. c Fore esse 〈◊〉 fore esse debere Vid. alt ib. reciting the breach of former Oaths d Rot. Pat. sup Hereditas sive hereditaria e Rot. Pat. 8 H. 4. p. 1. m. 4. a Rot. Pat. 8. H. 4. Ponrvous succeder en voz saisditz corone roialms Seigniories pur les avoir ove routz leur appurtenances apres vre decesse a luy c. b Communi consensu regni juxta morem ejusdem regni c. c Heir apparent pour vous succeder d Pol. Virg. in Vit. H. 5. Drs. Gale Praef. Script Saxon. Dan. e Walsingham f Polydore Virgil. In quo de Rege creando more majorum agitabatur Vid. etiam Stow in the Reign of H. 5. mentioning this and calling that Assembly a Parliament g Rot. Parl. 1 H. 6. h 13 H. 6. a Vid. the Oath 29 H. 6. Stow f. 395. I am and ought to be humble subject and Lieage-man c. b Rot. Parl. 38 H. 6. n. 7. a Rot. Parl. 39 H. 6. n. 11. b N. 12. c Vid. unreasonableness of the new separation Fortescue's MS. of this belongs to the Cotton Library but not now to be found there unless restored very lately b N. 15. To be unto him and to the Heirs of his Body coming and to his 4 Sons c. c Elianor Wife of Lewis King of France Mat. Par. de An. 1150. d Mat. West f. 1200. a Vid. Sup. p. 27. b Vid. Grot. de jure belli pacis l. 2. sect 24. For the Neice from the elder Son to exclude the younger Son cannot hold in Hereditary Kingdoms For that gives only a capacity to succeed But of those that are capable regard is to be had to the priviledge of the Sex c Fortescue de Laud. Legum Angl. Rex a populo potestatem effluxam habet Vid. Rot. de B. R. d Grot. de jure belli pacis Lib. 2. e Ib. Sect. 14. Sect. 22. a Rot Parl. 39 H. 6. n. 18. The Oaths that the said Lords had made unto the King's highness c. saved and their consciences therein cleared c. it was agreed that the said mean the should be opened and declared to the King's highness b N. 18. c N. 27. The King by advice of the Lords condescended to the Accord and to be authoriz'd by Authority of this present Parliament d Baggot's Case 9 E. 4. Car-le corone fuit taille a lay per Parlement saving and ordaining by the same auctority the King to have the said Corones Reaumes Roial Estate Dignity and Preemirence of the same and the said Lordship of Ireland during his lyf natural e An. 1460. And furthermore by the same avis and auctoritie wolle consenteth and agreeth that after his decesse or when it shall pleas his highness to ley from him the said Corones c. or thereof ceasseth c. a Stow. f. 413. b Vid. Notes upon the Earl of Stamford's Speech An. 1692. Citting Grafton's Chron. f. 652 653. 658. Speed f. 851. Stow f. 414 415. c Ib. d 3d. Not mentioned in those Notes but in Hollinshead f. 663. e Notes upon the Earl of S's Speech Sup. a Hollinshead 663. After the Earl of March had taken upon him the Government b Rot. Parl. 1. E. 4. m. 8. Declaratio tituli regii restitutio ad eandem c Ib. d Rot. Parl. 1 E. 4. m. 8. n. 20 21 22 23 24. a Rot. Parl. 1 E 4. m. 17. Convictio quorundam Dom. al. authoritate Parl. The Earl of March upon the death of R. 2. and consequently E. 4. from him was undoubted a Vid. The Debate at large c. p. 128. b Rot. Parl. 1. E. 4. m. 7. 8. and that God had given Ed. the
says they assembled in order to exalt Henry the King 's eldest Son to be King of England He took the Coronation Oath more han once and at one of his Coronations had the Confessor's Sword carried before him by the Earl of Chester one of the Earls Palatine of England for a sign that that Sword was not to be born in vain He having trod in his Father's steps the States were likely to have made good their solemn denunciation 17th of his Reign of deposing him in a Common-Council of the whole Kingdom and creating a new King which as appears by Bracton a very learned Judge in that Reign was no more than the then known Law of the Kingdom Various were the events of a long Civil War in which at last the death of the great Darling of the Church and People the then Hereditary High Steward of England and the bravery of Henry's Son gave him the victory which they who were on his side and his own experience of the consequence of his former Counsels kept withing some bounds of moderation Henry to secure the Succession to his eldest Son Edward had before that success caused many and particularly the Citizens of London to swear to his Son as Successor And after that it should seem that a Parliament had made a Settlement of the Crown For in the 55th of his Reign a Writ was sent to London the execution of which was return'd into the Parliament that year at Winchester and 't is probable the like had been throughout England in pursuance of which Writ the Mayor Barons Citizens and University of the Commons swore Allegiance to the King after him to his eldest Son Edward then to his Son John after that to the right Heirs of the Crown of England which not being to the Heirs of either of those Persons plainly left the Inheritance as I have shewn it was from the beginning Upon the Father's death the Clergy and Laity flock'd to Westminster where they declared or received for King Edward then beyond-sea in the Holy War so called Soon after this as I take it a great Convention of the States was holden in his name there a Chancellor was chosen and other Provisions made for the Peace of the Kingdom in Edward's absence the Writ which they issued out requiring the Subjects in general to swear Allegiance to E. 1. says the Government was devolved upon him by Hereditary Succession and the Will of the Nobility and the Fidelity performed or Allegiance sworn to him Agreeably to which Walsingham says they recognized Edward their Leige Lord and ordained him Successor of his Father's honour Tho' he was a very gallant Prince yet having taken ill advice being to cross the Seas he upon a Pedestal at Westminster-Hall Gate with the Archbishop of Canturbury and the Earl of Warwick by his side publickly ask'd forgiveness of his People entreated 'em to receive him again at his return and if he died to Crown his Son King which they who were then assembled consented to How much it was then known to concern a King to keep to his part of the Contract as he would have his People continue bound appears by two great Authorities in our Law of that time Fleta who as to this matter transcribes Bracton almost verbatim and the Mirrour of Justices which speaks of the first Institution of Kings among us by Election for what End they were Elected and what they were to expect if they answered not that End E. 2. as Walsingham informs us succeeded not so much by Hereditary Right as by the unanimous Assent of the Nobility and Great Men. He was for misgovernment formally depos'd or Abdicated from the Regal Dignity as Walsingham has it and his Son Edward was Substituted or Elected in his stead The Son indeed tho he had headed Forces against his Father seem'd to scruple accepting the Crown without his Fathers consent And ex post Facto after Edw. 2d had been deposed and his Son Elected with a threat that if he refused they would Elect sombody else the Father took some comfort at the Election of his Son and as much as in him lay consented The Son it must be own'd in a Writ cited by Dr. Brady says his Father amoved himself by the assent of the Prelates Earls Barons and other Nobles and also of the Commonalâ—y of the whole Kingdom Which being onely in Writs Issued out of the Chancery can be of no Force to limit or explain that Act of the States And was but a civility or complement from the Son to the Father What the States judged in the matter will be very plain from the following account in a contemporary Author King Edward remaining in Custody at Kenelworth a General Council of the whole Clergy and People of England was Summon'd viz. of every City and every County and Borough a certain number of Persons to Treat and Ordain with the Great Men of the State of the King and Kingdom In which Council at the cry of the whole People unanimously persevering in that cry that King Edward II. should be Deposed from the Throme of the Kingdom becuase from the beginning of his Reign to this day he had misbehaved himself in his Government had Ruled his People wickedly had dissipated Lands Castles and other things belonging to the Crown had by perverse Judgment unjustly adjudged Noblemen to Death had advanced the Ignoble and had done many things contrary to the Oath taken at his Coronation Walter Archbishop of Canterbury pronouncing Articles of this kind by assent and consent of all King Edward 2. is wholly deposed and Edward his eldest Son advanced to be King of England And it is Ordained that from thenceforth he should not be called King but Edward of Karnarvan the King's Father And immediately Messengers were sent from the Council to the said Edward the King's Father to notifie to him what had been done and to read to him the Articles upon which he had been deposed He answer'd he was detained in custody nor could contradict their Ordinances but said he would bear all patiently And it is observable that a Statute of the Kingdom 1 E. 3. justifies the taking Arms against E. 2. while he was in Possession of the Throne and indemnifies all Persons for the pursuit of the said King and taking and withholding his body E. 3. who knew that himself came in by and election of the States being aware that if he should die before any Provision were made about the Succession the Controversie concerning the Right of Proximity and that of Representation would be revived between his eldest surviving Son and Grandson by the eldest who died in his life time obtained an Act of Parliament whereby Richard his Grandson by his eldest and best beloved Son was declared or made very