voce loquerentur Laws were invented to the end they should speak in one and the self-same sense to all men For which very reason in like manner these Laws have been called by Phylosophers a Rule or Square inflexible and by Aristotle in particular a mind without passion as hath been said but the Prophet David who was also a Prince and a King seemeth to call it by the name of Discipline for that as Discipline doth keep all the parts of a Man or of a particular House in order so Law well ministred keepeth all the parts of a Commonwealth in good order and to shew how severely God exacteth this at all Princes hands he saith these words And now learn ye Kings and be instructed you that judge the World Serve God in fear and rejoyce in him with trembling embrace ye Discipline lest he enter into wrath and so ye perish from the way of Righteousness Which words being uttered by a Prophet and a King do contain divers points of much consideration for this purpose As first that Kings and Princes are bound to learn Law and Discipline and secondly to observe the same with great humility and fear of God's wrath and thirdly that if they do not they shall perish from the way of Righteousness as though the greatest plague of all to a Prince were to lose the way of Righteousness Law and Reason in his Government and to give himself over to passion and his own will whereby they are sure to come to Shipwrack And thus much for the first help The second help that Commonwealths have given to their Kings and Princes especially in latter Ages hath been certain Counsels and Counsellors with whom to consult in matters of importance as we see the Parliaments of England and France the Courts in Spain and Dyets in Germany without which no matters of moment can be concluded And besides this commonly every King hath his Privy-Councel whom he is bound to hear and this was done to temper somewhat the absolute form of a Monarchy whose danger is by reason of his sole Authority to fall into Tyranny as Aristotle wisely noteth in his fourth Book of Politicks shewing the inconvenience or dangers of Government which is the cause that we have few or no simple Monarchies now in the world especially among Christians but all are mixt lightly with divers points of the other two forms of Government also and namely in England all three do enter more or less for in that there is one King or Queen it is a Monarchy in that it hath certain Counsels that must be heard it participateth of Aristocratia and in that the Commonalty have their Voices and Burgesses in Parliament it taketh part also of Democratia or popular Government All which limitations of the Princes absolute Authority as you see do come from the Common-wealth as having Authority above their Princes for their restraint to the good of the Realm as more at large shall be proved hereafter From like Authority and for like Considerations have come the limitations of other Kings and Kingly power in all times and Countries from the beginning both touching themselves and their Posterity and Successors as briefly in this place I shall declare And first of all if we will consider the two most renowned and allowed States of all the World I mean that of the Romans and Grecians we shall find that both of them began with Kings but yet with far different Laws and Restraints about their Authorities For in Rome the Kings that succeeded Romulus their first Founder had as great and absolute Authority as ours have now adays but yet their Children or next in Bloud succeeded them not of necessity but new Kings were chosen partly by the Senate and partly by the People as Titus Livius testifieth so as of three most excellent Kings that ensued immediately after Romulus viz. Numa Pompilius Tullius Hostilius and Tarquinus Priscus none of them were of the Bloud-Royal nor of Kin the one to the other no nor yet Romans born but chosen rather from among strangers for their Vertue and Valour and that by election of the Senate and consent of the People In Greece and namely among the Lacedemonians which was the most eminent Kingdom among others at that time the succession of Children after their Fathers was more certain but yet as Aristotle noteth their Authority and Power was so restrained by certain Officers of the people named Ephori which commonly were five in number as they were not only checked and chastned by them if occasion served but also deprived and sometimes put to death For which cause the said Phylosopher did justly mislike this eminent Jurisdiction of the Ephori over their Kings But yet we see hereby what Authority the Commonwealth had in this case and what their meaning was in making Laws and restraining their Kings Power to wit thereby the more to bind them to do Justice which Cicero in his Offices uttereth in these words Justitiae fruendae causa apud majores nostros in Asia in Europa bene moraâ—i reges olim sunt constituti c. at cum jus aequabile ab uno viro homines non consequerentur inventae sunt leges Good Kings were appointed in old time among our ancestors in Asia and Europe to the end thereby to obtain Justice but when men could not obtain equal Justice at one mans hands they invented Laws The same reason yieldeth the same Phylosopher in another place not only of the first Institution of Kingdoms but also of the change thereof again into other Governments when these were abused Omnes antiquae gentes regibus quondam paruerunt c. That is All old Nations did live under Kingdoms at the beginning which kind of Government first they gave unto the most just and wisest men which they could find and also after for love of them they gave the same to their Postesity or next in Kin as now also it remaineth where Kingly Government is in use But other Countries which liked not that form of Government and have shaken it off have done it not that they will not be under any but for that they will not be ever under one only Thus far Cicero and he speaketh this principally in defence of his own Commonwealth I mean the Roman which had cast off that kind of Government as before hath been said for the Offence they had taken against certain Kings of theirs and first of all against Romulus himself their first Founder for reigning at his pleasure without Law as Titus Livius testifieth for which cause the Senators at length slew him and cut him in small pieces And afterwards they were greatly grieved at the entring of Servius Tullius their sixth King for that he got the Crown by fraud and not by election of the Senate and special approbation of the People as he should have done But most of all they
Polit. Diversity of Government in divers Countries and Times Rome Africa and Greece Italy Dukes for Kings and Kings for Dukes Spain Bohemia Polonia England The Jews lib. Genes Lib. Exo. Lib. Job Lib. Jud. Lib. 1. Reg. Lib. Machab The Realm chuseth her Form of Government The Commonwealth limiteth the Governours Authority A Natural Prince A Monarchy the best Government Arist. lib. 4. pol. a. c. 9. Seneca Plutarch The Antiquity of Monarchy 1 Reg. 8. Dionys. Haly l. 5. Cornel. Tacit. l. 3. Cicero l. 1. Offic. Hierom. l. 2. epist. 12. Chrisost. ho. 23. 1 Pet. 2. Two Points to be noted How St. Peter calleth a King most excellent Utilites of a Kingdom and conveniences of other Governments Cicero l. 1. offic Democratia Miseries of Popular Government in Italy Tit. liv l. 30. Eutrop. l. 3. Oros. l. 5. 6. The cause why Laws be added to Kings Arist. l. 3 pol. c. vitâ— A notable Saying Arist. l. 3â— pol. c. 12. Arist. l. 1. Pol. c. 2. Divers â—â—â—nes and properties of Laws Cic. lib. 2. Offic. Law is the Discipline of a weal publick Psal. 2. The Counsels of Princes a great help Arist. l. 4. Pol. c. 10. The Monarchy of England temper'd The restraints of Kingly power in all Estates Roman Kings Liv. lib. 1. dâ—c 1. Greâ—ian Kings Arist. lib. 2. c. 8. polit Plutarch in Lycurg Cic. l. â— Offic. Why Kiâ—â— were restrained Laws Cic. l. 3. de legibuâ— Why Kinâ—â—ly Goverâ—â—ment we left in Rome Titus Livâ—â—â—us l. 1. dec 8. Livius ibidem Restrain's of Kingdoms in Europe Sleydon lib. 8. Aâ— 1532. Blond Dâ—â—cad 2. l. Crant li. cap. 25. Kingdoms of Polonia and Bohemia Her l. 9. Hist. Polonia Cromerus l. 3. Hist. Polon Kings of Spain France and England Concil blet 4. c. 74. concil s. c. 3. Peculiar manner of Succession An. 1340. Paul Anil Hist. Franc. l. 2. Gerard du Hailan l. 4. Hist. Franc. Fran. Belfor l. 5. c. 1 An. 1327. Reason for Succession of Women The Infanta of Spain and Prince of Lorrain Gerard dâ— Hailain lib. 13. Hiâ—â— Franc. c An. 1317 lib. 14 An. 132â— lib. 3. dâ— l'Estat de frunce Kings lawfully possessed may be deprived A markable circumstance Against Rebillions People and contemnorâ— of Princes 2 Pet. 2.10 Jude 8. Titles of Princes once settled not to be examined by private men Against flatterers that yield too much power to Princes Absurd flateries uttered by Belloy and others Belloy in apolog Cath. apolog pro Rege The purpose of the next Chapter Two points to be proved Nothing hear spoken against due respect to Princes ☜ Deprivations of Kings recounted in Scripture ☜ 1 Reg. 31. 4 Reg. 21.44 King Josias 2 Paralip 34. 2 Paralip 35. King David Xenophon in Cyropaed Ni. Machâ— l. 2. c 2. â— Tit. Liviâ— August l. de Gran. The wisdome and piety of King David 1 Paralipâ— 15. 1 Psal. 22â— 25. The Arms King David His Valour in Chivalry King David ' s Victories 2 Reg. 8. 1 Paral. 18 2 Reg. 23. Joseph l. 7. antiq c. 10 2 Reg. 7. His Humiliâ—y Charity and Devotion Kings put down among the Romans and what Successors they had Halicar l. 1 Tertul. l. de praescrip contra haeres Justin. martyr apolog T it liv l. 1 dec 1. Eutrop. l. 1 Caesar Augustus Dion in Caesa. Sueton in Câ—esa Nero Vespatian Cornel. Tacit. lib. 10 81. Egesip l. 5 Entrop in vita Caesa. Heliogabalus An. Domâ— 124. Alius lamp in vita Heliog Alexander Severus Herod in vit Sever Maxentius Constantin The bhange of the East Empire Charles the Great An. 800. Two chanâ—gs in France Belfori l. â— Girard l. â— Aemil. l. 2 Clem. Caudin en la Chroâ—nique des Roys de France Reasons Deprivation Hugo Capet Anno 988. Examples of Spain Concil Tolet. 4. cap. 4. Ambros. moral l. 11 cap. 17. Isidor in Hist. Hispan Estevan â— Garibay 13. de la â— Hist. de â—spa c. 1 Tabulae Astron. Alfonsinae King Don Alonso deposed Don Pedrâ— Crâ—el deposed Garibay l. 14. c. 40.41 In Portugal King Don Sancho 2. deposed Garibay lib. 4. de Hist. Portug c. 19. Lib. 6. dâ—â—â—cret tit de suppleâ— da cap. Grand 1. Garibay in Hist. dâ— Portug 〈◊〉 34. cap. 2. The Emperrors of Greece Galicas in Annal. part 4. Zon. Annal co 3. in vita Michael Calapha In Polonia In literis reip Polon ad Henr. Valesium pag. 182.184 Vide Gagneum part 1. de rebus Polon In Suetia Poilin 1.32 Histor de Franc. An. 1568. In Denmark Sleydanâ— l. 4. Hisâ— An. 133â— Munst. 〈◊〉 Cosmogâ— descript Davide Paulus â— vius in ris illust Example of England King Joâ—â— Deposed Polid. hiâ—â— Ang. l. 1â— An. 121. An. 1216. An. 1216. King Henry the third King Edward the second deposed Polyd. l. 18 Hist Ang. An. 1386. Stow in the Life of K. Edward the second The manner of Deprivation of a King See Stow and Hollings in this man's Life King Edward the third King Richard the second Deposed Polyd. l. 20. Hist. Aug. 1399. King Henry the 6th Deposed Polyd. lib. 23. Hist. Anglic. K. Richâ— the thiâ—â— deposedpunc An. 1â— A poâ—â— much noted The reply of the Temporal Lawer Belloy apolog Cathol c. part 2. Paragraph 9. Apol. pro. Regâ—â— cap. 9. An objection out of the Prophet Samuel 1. Reg. 8. The Power of a King or rather of a Tyrant Belloy polog pâ— 2. Paraâ— Apolâ— rege câ— 2.4 c Great aâ—surditieâ— flateriesâ— Cic. lib. 2. offic Another absurdity Institut imperial l. 2. Tit. 1. Division of goods by Civil Law Slaves and Freemen Arist. l. â— pol. c. 4 â— Arist. l. â— c. 3. Mark the Reason Divers evident reasons against Belloy 3 Reg. 21. Cap. inovamus 10. de cauebus c. super quibusdam 26. §. de verborum signif An Answer to the Objection out of the Prophet Samuel Arist. l. pol. c. 1â— Joseph l. â— antiq c. â— Deut. 1â— 3 Reg. 10. Psal. 2. By what Law Princes are punished The difference beween a private man and a Common-wealth The Prince Authority but subdelegat In reguliâ— utrinque juris vide in sine sexti Decret reg 75.69 When an Oath bindeth not Cicero li. 1. Offic. A clear Example Math. 24. Regul 68. in sine 6. Decret Decret Greg. l. Tit. 24. Decret part 2. caâ— sa 22. quâ— 4. c. 5. â— quâ— 5. perâ—â—totuâ— Two principle cases when Oath hold not â—â—wards a Prince Aemil. l. 2. Hist. Franc. Belfor in vita Childer Girad lib. 3. The Speech of the Fren. Embassador for deprivation of their King The conclusion how when Oaths do not bind Subjects The difference between a King and a Tyrant Plat. dial 1. de repub Arist. li. 2. Pol. c. 5. Bart. li. de Tyrannide Cicero li. 3. de legibus God l. 1. Tit. 14 §. digna Suet. c. 23. in Calig Zoo tom 2 in Trainâ— See in the Chapter following The Speech of a Souldier The occasion of the next Chapter The
naturae the voice of nature her self for there was never yet Nation found either of ancient time or now in our days by discovery of the Indies or else where among whom men living together had not some kind of Magistrate or Superior to govern them which evidently declareth that this point of Magistrates is also of Nature and from God that created Nature which point our Civil Law doth prove in like manner in the very beginning of our digests where the second Title of the first Book is de origine juris civilis omnium magistratuum of the beginning of the Civil Law and of all Magistrates which beginning is referred to this first principle of Natural Instinct and Gods Institution And last of all that God did concur also expresly with this Instinct of Nature our Divines do prove by clear testimony of Holy Scripture as when God saith to Solomon By me Kings do Reign and St. Paul to the Romans avoucheth That Authority is not but of God and therefore he which resisteth Authority resisteth God Which is to be understood of Authority Power or Jurisdiction in it self according to the first Institution as also when it is lawfully laid upon any person for otherwise when it is either wrongfully taken or unjustly used it may be resisted in divers cases as afterwards more particular shall be declared for then it is not lawful Authority These two points then are of Nature to wit the Common-wealth and Government of the same by Magistrates but what kind of Government each Common-wealth will have whether Democretia which is Popular Government by the People it self as Athens Thebes and many other Cities of Greece had in old time and as the Cantons or Switzers at this day have Or else Aristocretia which is the Government of some certain chosen number of the Best as the Romans many years were governed by Councels and Senators and at this day the States of this Countrey of Holland do imitate the same or else Monarchia which is the Regiment of one and this again either of an Emperor King Duke Earl or the like These particular Forms of Government I say are not determined by God or Nature as the other two points before for then they should be all one in all Nations as the other are seeing God and Nature are one to all as often hath been said but these particular Forms are left unto every Nation or Countrey to chuse that Form of Government which they shall like best and think most fit for the Natures and conditions of their people which Aristotle proveth throughout all the second and fourth Books of his Politiques very largely laying down divers kinds of Government in his days as namely in Greece that of the Milesians Lacedemonians Candians and others and shewing the causes of their differences which he attributeth to the diversity of mens Natures Customs Educations and other such causes that made them make choice of such or such Forms of Government And this might be proved also by infinite other examples both of times past and present and in all Nations and Countries both Christian and otherwise which have not had only different Fashions of Governments the one from the other but even among themselves at one time one form of Government and another at other times For the Romans first had Kings and after rejecting them for their Evil Government they chose Councils which were two Governours for every year whose Authority yet they limited by a multitude of Senators which were of their Council and these mens power was restrained also by adding Tribunes of the people and some time Dictators and finally they came to be governed last of all by Emperors The like might be said of Carthage in Africa and many Cities and Common-wealths of Greece which in divers Seasons and upon divers Causes have taken different Forms of Government to themselves The like we see in Europe at this day for in only Italy what different Forms of Government have you Naples have a King for their Soveraign Rome the Pope and under him one Senator in place of so many as were wont to be in that Common-wealth Venice and Genua have Senators and Dukes but little Authority have their Dukes Florence Farara Mantua Parma Vrbin and Savoy have their Dukes only without Senators and their power is absolute Milan was once a Kingdom but now a Dukedom the like is of Burgundy Lorain Bavire Gascony and Britain the lesser all which once had their distinct Kings and now have Dukes for their Supream Governours The like may be said of Germany that many years together had one King over all which now is divided into so many Dukedoms Earldoms and other like Titles of Supream Princes But the contrary is of Castile Aragon Portugal Barcelona and other Kingdoms this day in Spain which were first Earldoms only and after Dukedoms and then Kingdoms and now again are all under one Monarchy The like is of Bohemia and Polonia which were but Dukedoms in old time and now are Kingdoms The like may be said of France also after the expulsion of the Romans which was first a Monarchy under Pharamond their first King and so continued for many years under Clodion Merovys Childrik and Clodovaeus there first Christened Kings but after they divided it into four Kingdoms to wit one of Paris another of Soissons the third of Orleans and the fourth of Metts and so it continued for divers years but yet afterwards they made it one Monarchy again England also was first a Monarchy under the Brittains and then a Province under the Romans and after that divided into seven Kingdoms at once under the Saxons and now a Monarchy again under the English and all this by Gods permission and approbation who in token thereof suffered his own peculiar people also of Israel to be under divers manners of Governments in divers times as first under Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob then under Captains as Moses Joshua and the like then under Judges as Otheniel Aiod and Gideon then under High Priests as Hely and Samuel then under Kings as Saul David and the rest and then under Captains and High Priests again as Zorobabel Judas Machabeus and his Brethren until the Government was lastly taken from them and they brought under the power of the Romans and Forraign Kings appointed by them So as of all this there can be no doubt but that the Common-wealth hath power to chuse their own Fashion of Government as also to change the same upon reasonable causes as we see they have done in all times and Countries and God no doubt approveth what the Realm determineth in this point for otherwise nothing could be certain for that of these changes doth depend all that hath succeeded sithence In like manner is it evident that as the Common-wealth hath this authority to chuse and change her Government
and the Earl of Flanders the Sword Royal so that there are three Dukes three Earls in every one of both Ranks of Spiritual and Temporal Lords and as Gerard noteth the King is apparelled on this day three times and in three several sorts The first as a Priest the second as a King and Warriour the third as a Judge And finally he saith that this Solemnity of Anointing and Crowning the King of France is the most magnificent Gorgeous and Majestical thing that may be seen in the world for which he referreth us not only to the particular Coronations of these two ancient Kings Philip the first and second but also to the late Coronation of Henry the second Father to the last Kings of France which is also in print and indeed is a very goodly and most notable thing to be read though indeed much more to be seen But to say a word or two more of Philip Augustus before I pass any further which happened in the Year 1179. and in the 25. of the reign of our King Henry the second of England who as the French Histories say was present also at this Coronation and had his Rank among the Peers as Duke of Normandy and held the Kings Crown in his hand and one of his Sons had his Rank also as Duke of Gascony and the form used in this Coronation was the very same which is used at this day in the Admission of the Kings of France in recounting whereof I will let pass all the particular ceremonies which are largely to be read in Francis Belforest in the place before-mentioned and I will repeat only the Kings Oath which the said Author recounteth in these words The Archbishop of Rhemes being vested in his Pontifical attire and come to the Altar to begin Mass where the King also was upon a high seat placed he turned to him and said these words in the name of all the Clergy and Churches of France Sirs that which we require at your hands this day is that you promise unto us that you will keep all Canonical Priviledges Law and Justice due to be kept and defended as a good King is bound to do in his Realm and to every Bishop and Church to him committed whereunto the King answered I do promise and avow to every one of you and to every Church to you committed That I will keep and maintain all Canonical Priviledges Law and Justice due to every man to the utmost of my Power And by Gods help shall defend you as a good King is bound to do in his Realm This being done the King did Swear and make his Oath laying his hands upon the Gospel in these Words following Au nom de Jesus Christ je jure promets au Peuple Christien a moy suject ces choses c. Which is in English In the name of Jesus Christ I do Swear and promise to all Christian People subject unto me these points ensuing First to procure that all my Subjects be kept in the union of the Church and I will defend them from all Excess Rapine Extortion and Iniquity Secondly I will take order that in all Judgments Justice shall be kept with Equity and Mercy to the end that God of his Mercy may conserve unto me with you my People his Holy grace and mercy Thirdly endeavour as much as possible shall lie in me to chase and drive out of my Realm and all my Dominions all such as the Church hath or shall declare for Hereticks as God shall help me and his Holy Gospels Thus Sweareth the King and then kisseth the Gospel and immediatly is Sung Te Deum Laudamus and after that are said many particular Prayers by the Archbishop and then is the King vested and the Ring Scepter Crown and the other Kingly Ornaments and Ensigns are brought and put upon him with Declaration first what they signifie and then particular Prayers are made to God that their signification may be by the King fulfilled And after all ended the Archbishop with the Bishops do bless him and say these words unto him God which reigneth in Heaven and governeth all Kingdoms bless you c. Be you stable and constant and hold your Place and Right from hence forth which here is committed and laid upon you by the authority of Almighty God and by this present tradition and delivery which we the Bishops and other Servants of God do make unto you of the same and remember you in place convenient to bear so much more respect and reverence unto the Clergy by how much nearer than other men you have seen them to approach to God's Altar to the end that Jesus Christ Mediator of God and Man may confirm and maintain you by the Clergy and People in this your Royal Seat and Throne who being Lord of Lords and King of Kings make you Reign with him and his Father in the Life and Glory everlasting Thus saith the Archbishop unto him and after this he is led by him and the other Peers unto the Seat Royal where the Crown is put upon his Head and many other large Ceremonies used which may be read in the Author aforesaid and are too long for this place And yet have I been the larger in this matter of France for that I do not think it to be improbable which this Author and others do not to wit that most Nations round about have taken their particular Forms of Anointing and Crowning their Kings from this ancient custom of France though the substance thereof I mean of their Sacring and Anointing be deduced from Examples of far more Antiquity to wit from the very first Kings among the people of Israel whom God caused to be anointed by his Priests and Prophets in token of his Election and as a singular Priviledge of Honour and Preheminence unto them whereof King David made so great account when he said to the Souldier that had killed Saul his Enemy in the War quare non timuisti mittere manum tuam in Christum Domini Why didst thou not fear to lay thy hands upon the Anointed of God and he put him to death for it notwithstanding that Saul had been long before deposed and rejected by God and that himself had lawfully born Arms against him for many days so much was that Ceremony of Anointing esteemed in those days and so hath it been ever since among Christian People also For that Kings hereby are made Sacred and do not only participate with Priests but also with Christ himself who hath his Name of this circumstance of Anointing as all the world knoweth Probable then I say it is that albeit the substance of this ceremony of Anointing Kings be much elder than the Christian Kingdom of France yet is this particular and Majestical manner of doing the same by way of Coronation the most antient in France above all other Kingdoms round about especially if it began with the
affirmeth the state of Kingly Government to be most excellent it may seem he meant it absolutely signifying thereby that this is the best kind of Government among all others though to confess the truth between the Title of King and Emperor there is little or no difference in substance but only in name for that the Authority is equal every King is an Emperor in his own Kingdom And finally the excellency of this Government above all other is not only proved by the perfection thereof in it self as for that it is most Ancient Simple and conform unto Nature and most resembling the Government of God himself as hath been said but by the effects also and utility that it bringeth unto the Subjects with far less Inconveniences then any other Form of Government whatsoever if we compare them together For in the Monarchy of one King there is more Unity Agreement and Conformity and thereby also celerity in dispatching of business and is defending the Common-wealth then where many heads be less Passions also in one man then in many as for example in Democratia where the Common people do bear the chief sway which is Bellua multorum capitum as Cicero wisely said that is a beast of many Heads there is nothing but sedition trouble tumults outrages and injustices committed upon every little occasion especially where Crafty and Cunning men may be admitted to insense or asswage them with Sugred words such as were the Orators in Athens and other Cities of Greece that had this Government and the Tribunes of the people of Rome and other such popular and plausible men who could move the waves raise up the winds and inkindle the fire of the vulgar peoples affections passions or furies at their pleasure by which we see that of all other Common-wealths these of Popular Government have have soonest come to ruine which might be shewed not only by old examples of Greece Asia and Africa but also of many Cities in Italy as Florence Bolonia Siena Pisa Arezzo Spoleto Perugia Padua and others which upon the fall or diminution of the Roman Empire under which they were before took unto themselves Popular Governments wherein they were so tossed with continual Sedition Mutinies and banding of Factions as they could never have end thereof until after Infinite Murthers Massacres and Innundation of Blood they came in the end to be under the Monarchy of some one Prince or other as at this day they remain so that of all other Governments this is the worst The second Form which is called Oligarchia or Aristocratia for that a few and those presumed to be the best are joyned together in Authority as it doth participate some thing of both the other Governments to wit of Monarchia and Democratia or rather tempereth them both so hath it both good and evil in it but yet it inclineth more to the evil for the disunion that commonly by mans infirmity and malice is among those heads for which cause the States before-named of Venice and Genua which were wont to have simply this Government of Aristocratia in that their Regiment was by certain chuse Senators were inforced in the end to chuse Dukes also as Heads of their Senates for avoiding of dissention and so they have them at this day though their authority be but small as hath been said We see also by the examples of Carthage and Rome where Government of Aristocratia took place that the Division and Factions among the Senators of Carthage was the cause why Aid and Succour was not sent to Hannibal their Captain in Italy after his so great and Important Victory at Cannas which was the very cause of the saving of the Roman Empire and the loss of their own As also afterwards the Emulations Discord and Disunion of the Roman Senators among themselves in the Affairs and Contentions of Marius and Silla and of Pompey and Caesar was the occasion of all their destruction and of the Common-wealth with them Evident then it is that of all other Governments the Monarchy is the best and least subject to the Inconveniences that other Governments have and if the Prince that governeth alone and hath Supream Authority to himself as he resembleth God in this point of sole Government so could he resemble him also in Wise Discreet and Just Government and in ruling without Passion no doubt but that nothing more excellent in the world could be desired for the perfect felicity of his Subjects but for that a King or Prince is a man as others be and thereby not only subject to errors in Judgment but also to passionate affections in his will for this cause it was necessary that the Commonwealth as it gave him this great power over them so it should assign him also the best helps that might be for directing and rectifying both his will and judgment and make him therein as like in Government to God whom he representeth as mans frailty can reach unto For this consideration they assigned to him first of all the assistance and direction of Law whereby to govern which Law Aristotle saith Est mens quaedam nullo perturbata affectu it is a certain mind disquited with no disordinate affection as mens minds commonly be for that when a Law is made for the most part it is made upon due consideration and deliberation and without perturbation of evil affections as anger envy hatred rashness or the like passions and it is referred to some good end and commodity of the Common-wealth which Law being once made remaineth so still without alteration or partial affection being indifferent to all and partial to none but telleth one tale to every man and in this it resembleth the perfection as it were of God himself for the which cause the said Philosopher in the same place addeth a notable wise saying viz. That he which joyneth a Law to govern with the Prince joyneth God to the Prince but he that joyneth to the Prince his affection to govern joyneth a Beast for that mens affections and concupisenses are common also to Beasts so that a Prince ruling by Law is more than a man or a man deified and a Prince ruling by affections is less than a man or a man bruitified In another place also the same Philosopher saith That a Prince that leaveth Law and ruleth himself and others by his own appetite and affections of all Creatures is the worst and of all Beasts is the most furious and dangerous for that nothing is so outragious as Injustice armed and no Armour is so strong as Wit and Authority whereof the first he hath in that he is a Man and the other in that he is a Prince For this cause then all Commonwealths have prescribed Laws unto their Princes to govern thereby as by a most excellent certain and immutable rule to which sense Cicero said Leges sunt inventae ut omnibus semper una eadem
him and the Duke of York and solemnly sworn on both sides the 8 th of October in the year 1459 In punishment whereof and of his other negligent and evil Government though for his own particular Life he was a good man as hath been said Sentence was given against him partly by Force and partly by Law and King Edward the fourth was put in his place who was no evil King as all English-men well know but one of the renownedst for martial Acts and Justice that hath worn the English Crown But after this man again there fell another accident much more notorious which was That Richard Duke of Glocester this King Edward's younger Brother did put to death his two Nephews this man's Children viz. King Edward the 5 th and his little Brother and made himself King And albeit he sinned grieveously by taking the Crown in this wicked manner yet when his Nephews were once dead he might in reason seem to be lawful King both in respect that he was next Male in Bloud after his Brother as also for that by divers Acts of Parliament both before and after the death of those Infants his Title was authorized and made good and yet no man will say I think but that he was lawfully deposed again afterwards by the Commonwealth which called out of France Henry Earl of Richmond to chastize him and to put him down and so he did and took from him both Life and Kingdom in the Field and was King himself after him by the Name of King Henry the seventh And no man I suppose will say but that he was lawful King also which yet cannot be except the other might be lawfully deposed And moreover as I said at the beginning I would have you consider in all these mutations what men commonly have succeeded in the places of such as have been deposed as namely in England in the place of those five Kings before-named that were deprived viz. John Edward the second Richard the second Henry the sixth and Richard the third there have succeeded the three Henries to wit the third fourth and seventh and two Edwards the third and fourth all most rare and valiant Princes who have done infinite important Acts in their Commonwealths and among other have raised many Houses to the Nobility put down others changed States both abroad and at home distributed Ecclesiastical Dignities altered the course of Descent in the Bloud-Royal and the like all which was unjust and is void at this day if the changes and deprivations of the former Princes could not be made and consequently none of these that do pretend to the Crown of England at this day can have any Title at all because they descend from those men who were put up in place of the Deprived And this may be sufficient for proof of the two principal points which you required to be discussed in the beginning of this Speech viz. That lawful Princes have oftentimes by their Commonwealths been lawfully deposed for misgovernment and that God hath allowed of and assisted the same with good success unto the Weal-publick And if this be so or might be so in Kings lawfully set in possession then much more hath the said Commonwealth Power and Authority to alter the Succession of such as do but yet pretend to that Dignity if there be due reason and causes for the same which is the head point that first we began to treat of said the Civilian and with this ended he his Spech without saying any more CHAP. IV. Wherein consisteth principally the lawfulness of Proceeding against Princes which in the former Chapter is mentioned What Interest Princes have in their Subjects Goods or Lives How Oaths doth bind or may be broken by Subjects towards Princes And finally the difference between a good King and a Tyrant WHen the Civilian had ended his Speech the Temporal Lawyer looked upon the standers by to see whether any would reply or no and perceiving all to hold their peace he began to say in this manner Truly Sir I cannot deny but the examples are many that you have alledged and they seem to prove sufficiently that which you affirmed at the beginning to wit that the Princes by you named were deprived and put down by their Common-Wealths for their evil Government And good Successors commonly raised up in their places and that the Common-Wealth had Authority also to do it I do not greatly doubt at least wise they did it de facto and now to call those facts in question were to imbroyl and turn up-side-down all the states of Christendom as you have well signified but yet for that you have added this word Lawfuly so many times in the course of your narration I would you took the pains to tell us also by what Law they did the the same seeing that Belloy whom you have named before and some other of his opinion do afirm that albeit by nature the Commonwealth have authority over the Prince to choose and appoint him at the beginning as you have well proved out of Aristotle and other ways Yet having once made him and given up all their Authority unto him he is now no more Subject to their Correction or Restraint but remaineth Absolute of himself without respect to any but only to God alone which they prove by the example of every particular Man that hath Authority to make his Master or Prince of his Inferior but not afterwards to put him down again or to Deprive him of the Authority which he gave him though he should not bear himself well and gratefully but Discourteous rather and Injuriously towards him that gave him first this Authority To which also they do alledge the Speech of the Prophet Samuel in the first Book of the Kings where the People of Israel demanded to have a King to Govern over them as other Nations round about them had and to leave the Government of the High Priests under whom at that day they were At which demand both God himself and Samuel were grievously offended and Samuel by Gods express order protested unto them in this manner Well quoth he you will have a King hearken then to this that I will say Hoc erit jus regis qui imperaturus est vobis This shall be the Right and Power of the King that shall rule over you to wit He shall take from you your Children both Sons and Daughters your Fields and Vineyards your Harvest also and Rents your Servants Hand-maids and Herds of Cattel and shall give them to his Servants and you shall Cry unto God in that day from the face of this your King whom you have chosen and God shall not hear you for that you have demanded a King to Govern you Thus far the Prophet Out of all which discourse and Speech of the Prophet these Men do gather that a King is nothing so restrained in his Power or Limited to Law as you have affirmed but
meant when he threatened the Jews with the disorders of Kings that should reign over them not that these disorders were lawful or appertained to a righteous King but that seeing they refused to be under the moderate Government of their High-Priests and other Governours which God had given to them hitherto and required to be ruled by Kings as the Heathen Nations of Aegypt Babylon Syria and Persia were whose manner of Government not only Historiographers but Philosophers also and Aristotle among the rest doth note to have been very Tyrannical yet since the Jews would needs have that Government as a matter of more Pomp and Glory than that which hitherto they had had Samuel did first insinuate unto them what Extortion and Wickedness those Heathen Kings did use commonly over their people in taking their Children Servants Wives Goods and the like from them and that many Kings of Israel should do the like and take it for their Right and Sovereignty and should oppress and tyrannize over them and inforce them to cry out to God for help and they should not find remedy for that so headily they had demanded this change of Government which highly displeased Almighty God And this is the true meaning of that place if it be well considered and not to authorize hereby Injustice or Wickedness in any King seeing the principal points recorded to all Princes and Kings throughout the whole course of Scripture are dilligere judicium justitiam apprehendere Disciplinam facere veritatem that is to say To love Judgment and Justice to admit Discipline and to execute Truth And this is the Instruction that God gave to the Jews in Deutronomy for their Kings when they should have them which God fore-told many years before they had any And this is the Admonition that King David left unto his Son and Successor Solomon at his death and by him to all other Kings and Princes And for want of observing these points of Judgment Justice Discipline and Truth we see not only Ahab and Jezebel before-mentioned grievously punished but many other Kings also by God himself as Ahaz Manasses Joachim and the like which had not been Justice on God's part to punish them if it had been lawful for them to use what manner of proceeding towards their people as these good Instructers of Princes in our days most fondly and wickedly do affirm And thus much for that place But to the first point which you asked by what Law the Commonwealths that are mentioned in the former Chapters did punish their evil Princes I have answered you before that it is by all Law both Divine and Humane Divine for that God doth approve that form of Government which every Commonwealth doth choose unto it self as also the Conditions Statutes and Limitations which it self shall appoint unto her Princes as largely before hath been declared And by all Humane Law also for that all Law both natural national and positive doth teach us That Princes are subject to Law and Order and that the Common-wealth which gave them their Authority for the common good of all may also restrain or take the same away again if they abuse it to the common evil And whereas these men say That like as if a private man should make his inferiour or equal to be his Prince he could not after restrain the same again and so neither the Commonwealth having once delivered away her Authority I answer first That the comparison is not altogether like for that a private man though he give his voice to make a Prince yet he being but one maketh not a Prince as the Commonwealth doth and therefore no marvel though it lie not in a particular man to unmake him again Besides this a private man having given his voice to make his Prince remaineth subject and inferiour to the same but the whole Body though it be governed by the Prince as by the Head yet is not inferiour but superiour to the Prince neither so giveth the Commonwealth her Authority and Power up to any Prince that she depriveth her self utâ—eâ—ly of the same whoâ— need shall require to use it for her defence for which she gave it And finally which is the chiefest reason of all and the very ground and foundation indeed of all Kings Authority among Christians the Power and Authority which the Prince hath from the Commonwealth is in very truth not absolute but potâ—stas vicaria or deligate as we Civilians câ—lâ— it that is to say a power delegate or power by Commission from the Commonwealth which is given with such restrictions cautels and conditions yea with such plain Exceptions Promises and Oathâ— of both parties I mean between the King and Commonwealth at the day of Admission or Coronation as if the same be nor kept but wilfully broken on either part then is the other not bound to observe his Promise neither though never so solemnly made or sworn for that in all Bargains Agreements and Contracts where one part is bound mutually and reciprocally to the other by Oath Vow or Condition there if one side go from his promise the other standeth not obliged to perform his And this is so notorious by all Law both of Nature and Nations and so conform to all Reason and Equity that it is put among the very Rules of both the Civil and Canon-Law where it is said Frustra fidem sibi quis postulat servari ab eo cui fidem à se prestitatem servare recusat He doth in vain require promise to be kept unto him at another mans hands to whom he refuseth to perform that which himself promised And again Non abstringitur quis juramento ad implendum quod juravit si ab alio parte non impletur â—ujus respectu praebâ—it juramentum A man is not bound to perform that which by Oath â—e promised if on the other part that be not performed in respect whereof this Oath was made As for Example If two should swear the one to assist the other upon the way in all respects and after falling upon enemies that were either Kin or Friends to the one of them and he should take their part against his fellow cleer it is that the other was not bound to keep his Oath towards that party that hath so wickedly broaken it to him Nay not only in this case that is so evident and palpable by Nature it self but in many other also it is both lawful honest and convenient to leave some time the performance of our Oath as namely when the fulfilling thereof should come in any notable hurt or inconveniency against Religion Piety Justice Honesty or the weal-publick or against the party himself to whom it was made as if a Man had Sworn to restore a Sword to a mad or furious Man wherewith it were likely he would destroy himself and others and other like cases which Cicero putteth down in his first Book of Offices and
the old King David did bear unto her son Solomon above all the rest of his Brethren Hereupon I say these two that is to say Queen Barsabee and Nathan the Prophet coming together to the old man as he lay on his bed and putting him in mind of his promise and oath made to Barsabe for the preferment of her son and shewing besides how that Adonias without his order and consent had gathered an Assembly to make himself King even that very day which did put the old King in very great fear and danger and further also telling him which pleased him well quod oculi totius Israel in eum respicerent ut indicaret eis quis sederet in solio suo post ipsum that is that the eyes of all Israel were upon him to see whom he would commend unto them to sit in his seat after him which was as much as to say as that the whole Commonwealth referred it to his choice which of his sons should reign after him Upon these Reasons and Perswasions I say the good old King was content that they should take Solomon out of hand and put him upon the Kings own Mule and carry him about the streets of Jerusalem accompanyed with his Guard and Court and crying with sound of Trumpets Vivat Rex Solomon and that Zadok the Priest should anoint and after that he should be brought back and placed in the Royal Throne in the Palace and so indeed he was at what time King David himself being not able through impotency to rise out of his bed did him Honour and Reverence from the place where he lay for so saith the Scripture Adâ—ravit Rex in lectulo suo King David adored his son Solomon thus Crowned even from his Bed all which no doubt though it may seem to have been wrought by humane means and policy yet must we confess that it was principally by the especial Instinct of God himself as by the sequel and success we see so that hereby also we are taught that these the like determinations of the people Magistrates and Commonwealths about admitting or refusing of Princes to Reign or not to Reign over them when their designments are to good ends and for just respects and causes are allowed also by God and often times are his own special drifts and dispositions though they seem to come from man Whereof no one thing can give a more evident proof than that which ensued afterwards to Prince Rehoboam the lawful Son and Heir of this King Solomon who after his Fathers death coming to Sichem where all the People of Israel were gather'd together for his Coronation and Admission according to his Right by Succession For until that time we see he was not accounted true King though his Father was dead and this is to be noted the People began to propose unto him certain conditions for taking away of some hard and heavy Impositions laid upon them by Solomon his Father an evident President of the Oath and conditions that Princes do swear unto in these 〈◊〉 at their Coronation whereunto when Rehoboam refused to yield ten Tribes of the Twelve 〈◊〉 to admit him for their King but chose rather one Jeroboam Rehoboam's servant that was a meer stranger and but of poor percentage and made him their lawful King and God allowed thereof as the Scripture in express words doth testify and when Rehoboam that took himself to be openly injured hereby would by Arms have pursued his Title and had gathered together an Army of an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen Souldiers as the Scripture saith to punish these Rebells as he called them and to reduce these ten Tribes to their due Obedience of their natural Princes God appeared unto one Semeia an Holy man and bade him go to the Camp of Rehoboam and tell them plainly that he would not have them to fight against their Brethren that had chosen another King but that every man should go home to his House and live quietly under the King which each Party had and so they did and this was the end of that tumult which God for the sins of Solomon had permitted and allowed of And thus much by the way I thought good to touch out of Holy Scripture concerning the Jewish Commonâ—wealth even at the beginning for that it may give light to all the rest which after I am to treat of for if God permitted and allowed this in his own Common-wealth that was to be the example and pattern of all other that should ensue no doubt but that he approveth also the same in other Realms when just occasions are offered either for his service the good of the People and Realm or else for punishment of the sins and wickedness of some Princes that the ordinary line of Succession be altered Now then to pass on further and to begin with the Kingdoms of Spain supposing ever this ground of God's Oodinance as hath been declared First I say that Spain hath had three or four Races or Descents of Kings as France also and England have had and the first Race was from the Goths which began their Reign in Spain after the expulsion of the Romans about the Year of Christ 416. to whom the Spaniard referreth all his Nobility as the Frenchman doth to the German Franks and the English to the Saxons which entred France and England in the very same age that the other did Spain and the Race of the Gothish Kings endured by the space of 300 Years until Spain lost unto the Moores The second Race is from Don Pelayo that was chosen first King of Austria and of the Mountain-Countrey of Spain after the destruction thereof by the Moores about the Year of Christ 717 as before hath been touched which Race continued and encreased and added Kingdom unto Kingdom for the space of other three hundred Years to wit until the Year of Christ 1034. when Don Sancho Major King of Navarre got unto his Power the Earldom also of Aragon and Castilia and made them Kingdoms and divided them among his Children and to his second son named Don Ferdinando sirnamed afterward the Great he gave not only the said Earldom of Castilia with Title of Kingdom but by marrying also of the Sister of Don Dermudo King of Leon and Asturias he joined all those Kingdoms together and so began from that day forward the third Race of the Kings of Navar to reign in Castel and so endured for five hundred Years until the Year of Christ 1540. when the House of Austria entred to Reign there by Marriage of the Daughter and Heir of Don Ferdinando sirnamâ—d the Catholick and this was the fourth Race of Spanish Kings after the Roman's which endureth until this day And albeit in all these four Races and Ranks of Royal Descents divers Examples might be alledged for manifest proof of my purpose yet will I not deal with
reason is for that we read that this Lord Edmond was a goodly wise discreet Prince notwithstanding that some Authors call him Crouchback and that he was highly in the favour both of his Father King Henry as also of his Brother King Edward and imployed by them in many great Wars and other affairs of State both in France and other where which argueth that there was no such great defect in him as should move his Father and the Realm to deprive him of his Succession Thirdly we read that King Henry procured by divers ways and means the advancement of this Lord Edmond as giving him the Earldoms of Leicester and Darby besides that of Lancaster as also procuring by all means possible and with exceeding great charges to have made him King of Naples and Sicilie by Pope Innocentius which had been no policy to have done if he had been put back from his Inheritance in England for that it had been to have Armed him against his Brother the King Fourthly we see that at the death of his Father King Henry the III. this Lord Edmond was principally left in charge with the Realm his elder Brother Prince Edward being scarsly returned from the War of Asia at what time he had good occasion to challenge his own right to the Crown if he had had any seeing he wanted no power thereunto having three goodly Sons at that time alive born of his Wife Queen Blanch Daugher of Navarre and County of Champain to whom she had born only one Daughter that was married to Philip le Bel King of France But we shall never read that either he or any of his Children made any such claim but that they lived in very good agreement and high grace with King Edward the first as his Children did also with King Edward the II. until he began to be mis-led in Government and then the two Sons of this Lord Edmond I mean both Thomas and Henry that Successively were Earls of Lancaster made War upon the said Edward the II. and were the principal Actors in his deposition and in setting up of his Son Edward the III. in his place aâ— what time it is evident that they might have put in also for themselves if their title had been such as this report maketh it A fifth reason is for that if this had been so that Edmond Earl of Lancaster had been the elder Brother then had the controversie between the two Houses of York and Lancaster been most clear and without all doubt at all for then had the House of York had no pretence of right in the World and then were it evident that the Heirs general of Blanch Dutchess of Lancaster Wife of John of Gaunt to wit the descendents of Lady Philip her Daughter that was married into Portugal these I say and none other were apparent and true Heirs to the Crown of England at this day and all the other of the House of York usurpers as well King Henry the VII as all his posterity and off-spring for that none of them have descended of the said Blanch as is manifest And therefore lastly the matter standeth no doubt as Polidor holding in the latter end of the life of King Henry the III. where having mentioned these two Sons Edward and Edmond he addeth these words There wanted not certain men long time after this that affirmed this Edmond to be the elder Son to King Henry the III. and to have been deprived of his Inheritance for that he was deformed in body but these things were feigned to the end that King Henry the IV. that came by his Mothers side of this Edmond might seem to have come to the Kingdom by right whereas indeed he got it by force Thus saith Polidor in this place but afterward in the beginning of the life of the said King Henry the IV. he saith that some would have had King Henry to have pretended this Title among other reasons but that the most part accounting it but a meer fable it was omitted Now then it being clear that of these two Sons of King Henry the III. Prince Edward was the Elder and Lawful Heir it remaineth only that we set down their several descents unto the times of King Edward the III. and his Children in whose days the dissention and controversie between these Royal Houses of York and Lancaster began to break forth And for the Issue of Edward that was King after his Father by the name of King Edward the first it is evident that albeit by two several Wives he had a dozen Children male and female yet only his fourth Son by his first Wife called also Edward who was King after him by the name of King Edward the II left Issue that remained which Edward the II being afterward for his evil Government deposed left Issue Edward the III. who was made King by election of the people in his place and after a long and prosperous Reign left divers Sons whereof after we shall speak and among them his III. Son named John of Gaunt married Lady Blanch Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and of the forenamed Lord Edmond Crouchback by which Blanch John of Gaunt became Duke of Lancaster so as the lines of these two Brethren Edward and Edmond did meet and joyn again in the fourth descent as now shall appear by declaration of the Issue of the foresaid Lord Edmond Edmond then the second Son of King Henry the third being made County Palatine of Lancaster as also Earl of Leicester and of Darby by his Father King Henry as hath been said had issue three Sons to wit Thomas Henry and John among whom he divided his three States making Thomas his eldest Son County Palatine of â—ancaster Henry Earl of Leicester and John Earl of Darby But Thomas the eldest and John the youngest dying without Issue all three States fell again upon Henry the second Son which Henry had Issue one Son and three Daughters his Son was named Henry the second of that name Earl of Lancaster and made Duke of Lancaster by King Edward the third and he had one only Daughter and Heir named Blanch who was married unto John of Gaunt as before hath been said But Duke Henry's three Sisters named Joan Mary and Eleanor were all married to divers principal men of the Realm for that Joan was married to John Lord Maubery of whom are descended the Howards of the House of Norfolk at this day and Mary was married to Henry Lord Percy from whom cometh the House of the Earls of Northumberland and Eleanor was married to Richard Earl of Arundel thence is issued also by his Mothers side the Earl of Arundel â—hat now is so as of this ancient Line of Lancaster there want not noble Houses within the Realm at this day issued thence before the controversie fell out between York and this Family of which controversie how it rose and how it was continued I
married to the King of Norway all which Issue and Line ended about the year 1290. David younger Brother to King William had Issue two daughters Margaret and Isabel Margaret was married to Alain Earl of Galloway and had Issue by him a daughter that married John Balliol Lord of Harcourt in Normandy who had Issue by her this John Balliol Founder of Balliol Colledge in Oxford that now pretended to the Crown as descended from the eldest daughter of David in the third descent Isabel the second daughter of David was married to Robert Bruse Earl of Cleveland in England who had Issue by her this Robert Bruse Earl of Carick the other competitor Now then the question between these two competitors was which of them should Succeed either John Balliol that was Nephew to the elder daughter or Robert Bruse that was Son to the younger daughter and so one degree more near to the Stock or Stem then the other And albeit King Edward the first of England whose power was dreadful at that day in Scotland having the matter referred to his arbitrement gave sentence for John Balliol and Robert Bruse obeyed for the time in respect partly of fear and partly of his Oath that he had made to stand to that Judgment yet was that sentence held to be unjust in Scotland and so was the Crown restor'd afterward to Robert Bruse his Son and his posterity doth hold it unto this day In England also it self they alledge the examples of K. Henry the first preferred before his Nephew William Son and Heir to his elder Brother Robert as also the example of K. John preferred before his Nephew Arthur Duke of Britany for that King Henry the second had four Sons Henry Richard Geffery and John Henry died before his Father without Issue Richard Reigned after him and died also without Issue Geffery also died before his Father but left a Son named Arthur Duke of Britany by right of his Mother But after the death of King Richard the question was who should Succeed to wit either Arthur the Nephew or John the Uncle but the matter in England was soon desided for that John the Uncle was preferred before the Nephew Arthur by reason he was more near to his Brother dead by a degree then was Arthur And albeit the King of France and some other Princes abroad opposed themselves for stomack against this Succession of King John yet say these favourers of the House of Lancaster that the English inclined still to acknowledge and admit his right before his Nephew and so they proclaimed this King John for King of England while he was yet in Normandy I mean Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury Eleanor the Queen this Mother Geffery Fitz-peter chief Judge of England who knew also what law meant therein and others the Nobles and Barons of the Realm without making any doubt or scruple of his title to the Succession And whereas those of the House of York do alledge that King Richard in his life time when he was to go to the holy Land caused his Nephew Arthur to be declared Heir apparent to the Crown and thereby did shew that his title was the better they of Lancaster do answer first that this declaration of King Richard was not made by act of Parliament of England for that King Richard was in Normandy when he made this declaration as plainly appeareth both by Polidor and Hollingshed Secondly that this declaration was made the sooner by King Richard at that time thereby to repress and keep down the ambitious humor of his Brother John whom he feared least in his absence if he had been declared for Heir apparent might invade the Crown as indeed without that he was like to have done as may appear by that which happened in his said Brothers absence Thirdly they shew that this declaration of King Richard was never admitted in England neither would Duke John suffer it to be admitted but rather caused the Bishop of Ely that was left Governour by King Richard with consent of the Nobility to renounce the said declaration of King Richard in favour of Arthur and to take a contrary Oath to admit the said John if King Richard his Brother should die without Issue and the like Oath did the said Bishop of Ely together with the Archbishop of Roan that was left in equal Authority with him exact and take of the Citizens of London when they gave them their Priviledges and Liberties of Commonalty as Hollingshed recordeth And lastly the said Hollinshed writeth how that King Richard being now come home again from the War of Jerusalem and void of that jealousie of his Brother which before I have mentioned he made his last Will and Testament and ordained in the same that his Brother John should be his successor and caused all the Nobles there present to swear Fealty unto him as to his next in bloud for which cause Thomas Walsingham in his story writeth these words Johannis filius junior Henrici 2. Anglorum regis Alienorae Ducissae Aquitaniae non modo jure propinquitatis sed etiam testamento fratris sui Richardi designatus est successo post mortem ipsius which is John younger Son of Henry the second King of England and of Eleanor Dutchess of Aquitain was declared successor of the Crown not only by Law and right of nearness of bloud but also by the Will and Testament of Richard his Brother Thus much this ancient Chronicler speaketh in the testifying of King John's Title By all which examples that fell out almost within one age in divers Nations over the World letting pass many others which the Civilian touched in his discourse before for that they are of more ancient times these favourers of the House of Lancaster do infer that the right of the Uncle before the Nephew was no new or strange matter in those days of King Edward the third and that if we will deny the same now we must call in question the succession and right of all the Kingdoms and States before-mentioned of Naples Sicily Spain Britany Flanders Scotland and England whose Kings and Princes do evidently hold their Crowns at this day by that very Title as hath been shewed Moreover they say that touching Law in this point albeit the most famous Civil Lawyers of the World be somewhat divided in the same matter some of them favouring the Uncle and some other the Nephew and that for different reasons as Baldus Oldratus Panormitanus and divers others alledged by Gulielmâ—â— Benedictus in his Repetitions in favour of the Nephew against the Uncle And on the other side for the Uncle before the Nephew Bartolus Alexander Decius Altiatus Cujatius and many other their followers are recounted in the same place by the same man yet in the end Baldus that is held for head of the contrary side for the Nephew after all reasons weighed to and fro he cometh to conclude
far greater as now they live than in that case it would be suffered their King coming hereby to be of greater Power to force them to the form of English Subjection as no doubt but in time he would And seeing the greatest utility that in this Case by reason and probability can be hoped for by this Union is That the Scotish Nation should come to be advanced in England and to be made of the Nobility both Temporal and Spiritual and of the Privy-Council and other like Dignities of Credit and Confidence for otherwise no union or amity can be hoped for and considering That the King both for his own safety as hath been said as also for gratitude and love to his allied Friends must needs plant them about him in chief places of Credit which are most opposite to English Natures and by little and little through occasion of Emulations and of Controversies that will fall out daily betwixt such diversity of Nations he must needs secretly begin to favour and fortifie his own as we read that William the Conquerour did his Normands and Canutus before him his Danes to the incredible Calamity of the English Nation though otherwise neither of them was of themselves either an evil King or an Enemy to the English-Bloud but driven hereunto for their own safety and for that it was impossible to stand Newter in such national Contentions If all this I say fell out so then as we know it did and our Ancestors felt it to their extreme Ruine what other effect can be hop'd for now by this violent union of Nations that are by nature so dis-united and opposite as are the English Scotch Irish Danish French and other on them depending which by this means must needs be planted together in England And if we read that the whole Realm of Spain did refuse to admit St. Lewis King of France to be their King in Spain to whom yet by Law of Succession it was evident and confessed by the Spaniards themselves as their Chronicler Garibay writeth that the Right most clearly did appertain by his Mother Lady Blanch eldest Daughter and Heir of King Alonso IX and that they did this only for that he was a French-man and might thereby bring the French to have chief Authority in Spain And if for this Cause they did agree together to give the Kingdom rather to Ferdinando III. that was Son of Lady Berenguela younger Sister to the said Lady Blanch and if this determination at that time was thought to be wise and provident tho' against all right of Lineal Succession and if we see that it had good success for that it endureth unto this day what shall we say in this case say these men where the King in question is not yet a St. Lewis nor his Title to England so clear as that other was to Spain and the aversion â—etwixt his Nation and ours much greater than was that betwixt the French and Spanish Thus they do reason Again we heard out of the discourse made by the Civilian before how the States of Portugal after the death of their King Don Ferdinando the second of that Name who left one only Daughter and Heir named Lady Beatrix married unto John I. King of Castile to whom the Succession without all Controversie did appertain they rather determined to chuse for their King a Bastard-brother of the said Don Ferdinando named John than to admit the true Inheritrix Beatrix with the Government of the Castilians by whom yet they being much the richer People the Portugals might hope to reap far greater utility than English-men can do by Scotland considering it is the poorer Countrey and Nation And this is that in effect which these men do answer in this behalf noting also by the way that the Romans themselves with all their Power could never bring Union or Peace between these two Nations of England and Scotland nor hold the Scots and North-Irish in Obedience of any Authority in England and so in the end they were enforced to cut them off and to make that famous Wall begun by Adrian and pursued by other Emperours to divide them from England and bar them from joyning as all the World knoweth and much less shall any one King in England now hold them all in Obedience let him be of what Nation he will And this for the utility that may be hoped for by this Union But now for the point alledged by the favourers of Scotland about establishment of true Religion in England by the entrance of this King of Scots these other men do hold that this is the worst and most dangerous point of all other considering what the state of Religion is in Scotland at this day and how different or rather opposite to that form which in England is maintained and when the Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons and other such of Ecclesiastical and Honourable Dignities of England shall consider that no such Dignity or Promotion is left now standing in Scotland no nor any Cathedral or Collegiate Church is remained on foot with the Renâ—s and Dignities thereunto appertaining and when our Nobility shall remember how the Nobility of Scotland is subject at this day to a few ordinary and common Ministers without any Head who in their Synods and Assemblies have Authority to put to the Horn and drive out of the Realm any Noble-man whatsoever without remedy or redress except he will yield and humble himself to them and that the King himself standeth in aw of this exorbitant and popular power of his Ministers and is content to yield thereunto It is to be thought say these men that few English be they of what Religion or Opinion soever will shew themselves forward to receive such a King in respect of his Religion that hath no better Order in his own at home And thus much concerning the King of Scotland Now then it remaineth that we come to treat of the Lady Arabella second Branch of the House of Scotland touching whose Title though much of that which hath been said before for or against the King of Scotland may also be understood to appertain unto her for that she is of the same House yet I shall in this place repeat in few words the principal points that are alledged in her behalf or prejudice First of all then is alledged for her and by her â—avourers that she is descended of the foresaid Lady Margaret eldest Daughter of King Henry VII by her second Marriage with Archibald Douglas Earl of Anguis and that she is in the third degree only from her for that she is the Daughter of Charles Stuart who was Son of Margaret Countess of Lenox Daughter to the said Lady Margaret Queen of Scots so as this Lady Arabella is but Neece once removed unto the said Queen Margaret to wit in equal degree of descent with the King of Scots which King being excluded as the favourers of this Woman do
in England to favour him and his pretence or else in respect of his own particular Family Friends and Allies both at home and abroad And for that the Party of Religion is like to weigh most and to bear the greatest sway and most potent suffrage and voice in this action and that with reason according to that the Civilian hath proved at large in the last of his Discourses therefore shall I also quoth the Lawyer first of all then treat of this point of Religion in this my last Speech It is well known said he that in the Realm of England at this day there are three different and opposite Bodies of Religion that are of most bulk and that do carry most sway and power which three Bodies are known commonly in England by the names of Protestants Puritans and Papists though the latter two do not acknowledge these Names and for the same cause would not I use them neither if it were not only for clearness and brevities sake for that as often I have protested my meaning is not to give offence to any Side or Party These three Bodies then quoth he do comprehend in effect all the Force of England and do make so general a division and separation throughout the whole Land in the hearts and minds of their Friends Favourers and followers as if I be not deceived no one thing is like so much to be respected in each Pretender for his advancement or depression as his Religion or inclination therein by them that must assist him at that day and are of different Religions themselves And more I am of opinion said he that albeit in other changes heretofore in England as in the entrance of King Edward and Queen Mary and of this Queens Majesty that now is divers men of different Religions did for other respects concurr and joyn together for these Princes advancement notwithstanding that afterwards many of them repented the same which is to be seen in that for King Edward all the Realm without exception did concurr and for Queen Mary it is known that divers Protestants did by name and among other points it is also known that Sir Nicholas Throgmorton a fervent Protestant in those days being of King Edward's Privy Chamber did not only advise her of the sickness and decay of King Edward from day to day but also was the first that sent an express Messenger to advise her of her Brother's death and what the two Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk did contrive against her and that with such celerity that King Edward dying but on Thursday night the 10 th of July the Lady Mary was most certainly advised thereof by Saturday morning next and that very early in Kenning-hall-Castle of Norfolk 80. Miles off and divers other Protestants did assist her also in that her Entry as in like manner all those of the Roman Religion without exception did assist her Majesty that now reigneth after the decease of the said Queen Mary and this was then But I am of opinion that matters will fall out far otherwise at the next Change and this partly peradventure for that the titles of Succession in the Pretenders are not so clear but rather much more doubtful now than they were then and partly or rather principally for that men in time are come to be of more resolution and determination in matters of Religion and by contention and pursuing one the other are become more opposite and enemies and more desirous of revenge and further also than this those that be of milder and better condition and have not these passions in them yet by Reason and Experience they do see the great absurdity and inconvenience that ensueth by that a man of one Religion should give aid to the advancement of a Prince of a contrary Religion to that which himself doth esteem and hold for only truth which in him that so doth cannot be denied but that it is a point of little zeal at the least if not contempt of God and of Religion or of plain atheism as others will call it And moreover I remember that the Civilian before in the end of his Speech inveighed also much against this point and shewed that besides lack of Conscience and Religion it was in like manner against all humane wisdom and policy to favour a pretender of a different Religion from himself and this for divers reasons that he laid down which reasons I confess prevailed much with me and I do allow greatly of that his opinion and assertion which averred that the first respect of all others ought to be GOD and Religion in this great Affair of making a King or Queen and that without this no Title whatsoever ought to prevail or be admitted by Christian men and that the Cities of France at this day do not amiss but justly and religiously so long as they are of that Religion that they are to stand against the King of Navarr though otherwise by descent they do confess his Title to be clear and evident for that he is of contrary Religion to them Wherefore seeing that the very same Case is like or rather certain to ensue one day in England and that it is most probable that each Party of the Realm will stand most upon this Point that is to say upon the defence and advancement of their Religion and of such a King as shall be known to favour the same that themselves be of let us examin a little if you please quoth he what force ability each of these three Bodies of Religion now mentioned is like to be of at that day in England for effectuating or promoting this purpose of a new King And first to begin with the Protestant as with him that hath the sway of Authority and present Power of the State in his favour no doubt but that his force will be also great at that day said he and especially if he can conceal for a time the decease of her Majesty untill he may be able to put his Affairs in order but this is holden to be either impossible or very hard for the different judgments and affections which are not thought to be wanting in the Court Council and Princes Chamber it self whereof we saw the effect as before I told you at the death of King Edward which was as much endeavoured to be kept as ever any was and as much it imported the Concealers and yet within not many hours after had the Lady Mary most certain notice thereof â—y those that were opposite to her in Religion as I have shewed before so ardent are mens minds in such occasions and so capable of new impressions designments and desires are all kind of subjects upon such great changes A chief Member of the Protestant Body as you know for Wealth and Force is the Clergy of England especially the Bishops and other men in Ecclesiastical Dignity which are like to be a great Back to this Party at that
not of the House of Lancaster The King of Scots forrain born The controversie about forrain birth How strangers may inherit Reasons why the statute toucheth not one case The Crown not holden by allegiance 5. Reason King Henrys Testament against the King of Scots Answers to the King's Testament The King of Scots excluded by the statute of association Joyning of England and Scotland together Polyd. lib 17. in vit Edw. l. Inconveniences of bringing Strangers into England A Consideration of Importance Polyd. Hist Ang. l. 8. 9. Example of Spain Garibay l. 29. c. 42. An. Dom. 1207. Example out of Portugal Garibay l. 34. c. 38. An. Dom. 1383. Sâ—ow pa. 4. 54 59 90 76. Of â—he 〈◊〉 of Scotland Of the title of Lady Arabella An English Woman Against Arabella Not of the House of Lancaster The Testament of King Henry The countess of Darby nearer by a degree Illegitimâ—tion by â—â—sâ—ardy The Testimony of the L. William Howard Other reasons of 〈◊〉 against Arabâ—l◠〈…〉 Polyd. l. 12. Garibay l. 12. c. 42. â— The Issue of Charles Brandon Issue of Lady Frances Stow an 7. Edon 6. The Issue of the Lady Katharine The Issue of Lady Eleanor Allegations of the Houses of Darby and Hartford the one against the other Charles Brandon had a Wife alive First Bastardy against the Issue of Hartford Stow in vit Edward An. 1553. 2 Bastardy 3 Bastardy The fourth Bastardy common to both Families of Suffolk The Answer of tâ—ose of Hartford to the foresaid Bastardies Of the marriage between the Earl of Hartford and the Lady Katharine Gray How the second Son of the Earl of Hartford may be legitimate Allegations of the House of Darby Why the Earl of Huntingtonâ—â— House is 〈◊〉 to be of the House of Clarenâ—e Issue of tâ—â— House of Clâ—rence Issue of â—iâ— Geffrey Poole The interest and pretence of the Earl of Huntington Objections against the Earl â—f Huntingtâ—n Restitution may be in blâ—â—d without restitution of dignity The Pretence of the Pooles against Huntington Objections of Religion The House of Britany The course of Inheritance in the Crown of France First pretence of the Infanta to England Polyd. in vit Guil. Ruâ—â— Second pretence of the Infanta of Spain Pretence to Aquitain Polyd in vit Johan Garib in vit Alfons Pretences to England by Lady Blanch. Stow in vit Johannis Garib l. 12 c. 38. Pretence by Arthur Duke of Britany Belfor l 3. c. 71. Hist. Fran. Election of Lewis VIII to be King of England Poâ—yd l. 5. Hist. Angl. Hollings Stow in vit Johannis Belfor l. 2. c. 67. Girrard l. 5. Histor. Baudin an 891. chron France Pretence by Descent from Henry III. Admission by Composition Objections against the Infanta's pretence The Princes of Portugal are of the House of Lancaster The Issue of Lady Philippa Qu. of Portugal Issue of â—â—hn of Gaunt 〈…〉 â—ee the Arâ—â—◠〈◊〉 â—he 〈…〉 Book The point of difficulty Issue of Catharine Swinford The principal question Answer Dutchy of Lancaster The Crown An example of Edward the sixth and of the Prince of Spain 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 of Portugal The Dukedom of Lancaster The Legitiâ—â—â—ion â—f Câ—thâ—rin Swinfâ—rds Chilâ—â—â—â— noâ— lawfâ—l Stow in vit Riâ—har 2. Garibay hâ—st Portugal l. 35. cap. 4. Note this example â—tow in vit Henrici 2. John of Gauntes Marriage with Catherine Swinford helpeth not the Lâ—gitimaâ—ion The Question between Lady Philippa and John of Somerset The Question between the Nephews 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 Portugal The proper Interest of King Henry the 4th cannot descend to King Henry the 7th Who are the Princes of Portugal and how they pretend â—o England The Issue of King Emmanuel of Portugal Issue of K. John the 3. of Portugal K. Lewis Father of Don Antonio K. Henry Cardinal The pretence of the Qunen Mother of France to Portugal Five Pretenders of the Crown of Portugal The contention about the Succession of Portugal Attorneys sent to Portugal A Sentence of Illâ—â—â—imation against Don Antonio Writers of this Controversy The Causes why Don Antonio was pronounced Illegitimate Don Antonio his pretence to England Three principal pretenders of Portugal Pretences of the Duke of Parma For the Dutchess of Bragansa Representation excluded A Reply for â—he Duâ—e oâ— Paâ—ma King Philip 's pretence to Portugal Divers allegations for King Philip. Hieron Frakâ— Jo. Pâ—et Vipeâ— anus The case of pretence of the House of Portugal to England An objection with the answer Objections against the Pretenders of Portugal Answers Note this By what Title King Henry VII did enter About foreign power in England About Foreign Government The occasion of the next chapter about Foreign Government Reasons against foreign Government Polit. Arist. Demosthenis Philippicae in Aeschines Attempts to deliver Realms from strangers Quint. Curt. l. 5 6. de gest Alex. Vespere Sicilianae an 1265. Leand. in descript Siciliae Polyd. l. 8. Hollings in vit Camiti The rage of the French against the English The conclusion against Strangers Authority of Scripture against strangers Deut. 15. The answer in defence of foreign Government The effect of Governments to be considered and not the Governours An Example Little importeth the Subject of what Country his Governour is so he is good 1 Reg. 12. Not the Country but the good Government importeth Note these examples Who are properly Strangers Divers manners of being under Strangers To be undder strangers by Conquest How Conquerours do proceed towards â—he Conquered Polydor Virg. l. 8. Hist. Angliae Clemensy of the Romans Lib. 1. Macchab. â—ap 8. Strangers most favoured in wise Governments Gascoynes Britons Candians States oâ— Italy The condition of the Irish under the English Of the States of Flanders Girard du Haâ—lan l. 18. an 1381. Prosperity of Flanders under the House of Austria In Guiâ—ciard nella descrittione delli pasi bassi The Authority of the Flomings at home The Indulgence miâ—d â—o offenders 〈◊〉 â—landers The Spaniard punisheth less in Italy than nearer home Vâ—ceroyes do give account of their Government Much slaughter of Nobility in England Execution of Nobility by Henry the eight Under King Edward and Queen Mary States governed happily by foreign Princes Old afflictions of Naples and Millain Whether a great or little Prince be better Pedro Mexio en vit de Antonio Piâ—â— The felicity of the Roman Government The second way of being under a foreign Prince A foreign Prince without Forces not prejudicial Note this utility of a foreign King The manner of foreign Prince more commodious for the present A third way of being under foreign Government 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 Gâ—veâ—â—ent Inconâ—â—â—enceâ— of tâ—â—s Government Strange Governoâ—â—â— desired in some Realm The Answer to objections against foreign Government Answer the Grecian Philosophers and Orators Demosthenes The troublsome state of the Grecian Cities Arist. l. 2. â—olit c. 1.2 â—â—â—wer to 〈◊〉 objection out of Deuteronomy Deut. 15. Secondary Lines Ambiguity of Prevailing Two Grounds of probability of speeding Three Religions in England The great Importance of Religion in this Action The next Change like to be difficult and why The consideration of the Protestant Party The Clergy The Council and Nobility Persons designed or favoured by the Protestant Party Foreign Friends of the Protestants Of the Party Puritan Persons affected by the Puritans External Friends Lutheranâ— The Puritan at home Those of the Roman Religion Tâ—e Râ—man Party grâ—at and wâ—y 1 Reg â—2 〈…〉 Friends and Allies abroad Considerations of 〈◊〉 Pretender in particular The King of Scotland Arabella The Lord Beacham and the Earl of Darby Alliance of the Earl of Darby Aâ—â—ance of the Seymers Alliance â—â— the Stanleys Aâ—lâ—ance of the old Countess of Darby The States of the Lord Beacham and the Earl of Darby 〈…〉 Lords The Earl of Huntington 〈◊〉 of the 〈…〉 â—untingâ—â—â— The Power of London Polydor. 24 Holingshed in vita Henrici VI. The Houses of Britain and Portugal Infanta of Spain Duke of Parma The Duke of Bragansa Power of foreign Pretenders The first Conjecture that there will be War and why Sup. c. 4. A consideration to be marked The second conjecture no main Battel probable The third Conjecture who is likest to prevail For the Infanta of Spain For the Earl of Hartfod's second Son Sup. c. 6. For the Children of the Countess of Darby Garibay l. a 5. c. 36 Polydor in rit Steph.