Selected quad for the lemma: prince_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
prince_n	edward_n	henry_n	wales_n	3,941	5	10.5391	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43135	The right of succession asserted against the false reasonings and seditious insinuations of R. Dolman alias Parsons and others by ... Sir John Hayward ... ; dedicated to the King ; and now reprinted for the satisfaction of the zealous promoters of the bill of exclusion.	Hayward, John, Sir, 1564?-1627.	1683 (1683)	Wing H1233; ESTC R11039	98,336	190

ensign of the never-dying Majesty of the Crown In regard of this certain and incontinent succession the Glossographer upon the Decrees noteth That the Son of a King may be called King during the life of his Father as wanting nothing but administration wherein he is followed with great applause by Baldus Paenormitane Iason Carol. Ruinus Andreas Iserna Martinus Card. Alexander Albericus Fed. Barbatius Philip Decius and Ant. Corsetta Fra. Luca Matthe Afflict And the same also doth Servius note out of Virgil where he saith of Ascanius Regemque requirunt his Father Aeneas being yet alive But so soon as the King departeth out of life the Royalty is presently transferred to the next Successour according to the Laws and Customs of our Realm All Writs go forth in his Name all course of Justice is exercised all Offices are held by his Authority all States all Persons are bound to bear to him Allegeance not under supposal of approbation when he shall be Crowned according to your dull and drousie conjecture but as being the true Soveraign King of the Realm He that knoweth not this may in regard of the affairs of our State joyn himself to St. Anthony in glorying in his ignorance and professing that he knoweth nothing Queen Mary Reigned three months before she was Crowned in which space the Duke of Northumberland and others were condemned and executed for Treason for Treason I say which they had committed before she was proclaimed Queen King Edward the first was in Palestina when his Father died in which his absence the Nobility and Prelates of the Realm assembled at London and did acknowledge him for their King In his return homeward he did homage to the French King for the lands which he held of him in France He also repressed certain Rebels of Gascoine amongst whom Gasco of Bierne appealed to the Court of the King of France where King Edward had Judgment that Gasco had committed Treason and thereupon he was delivered to the pleasure of King Edward And this hapned before his Coronation which was a year and nine months after he began to reign King Henry the sixth was crowned in the eighth year of his Reign and in the mean space not only his Subjects did both profess and bear Allegeance but the King of Scots also did swear Homage unto him What need I give any more either instance or argument in that which is the clear Law the uncontrouled custom of the Realm Against which notwithstanding your weather-beaten forehead doth not blush to oppose a blind Opinion that Heirs apparent are not true Kings although their Titles be just and their predecessors dead This you labour to prove by a few dry conjectures but especially and above all others you say because the Realm is asked three times at every Coronation whether they will have such a man to be their King or no. First we have good reason to require better proof of this question than your bare word Secondly although we admit it to be true yet seeing the answer is not made by the Estates of the Realm assembled in Parliament but by a confused concourse necessary Officers excepted of all sorts both of Age and Sex it is for Ceremony only and not of force either to give or to increase any right Another of your Arguments is for that the Prince doth first swear to Govern well and justly before the Subjects take their Oath of Allegeance which argueth that before they were not bound And further you affirm that it hapned onely to King Henry the fifth among his predecessors to have fealty done unto him before he was crowned and had taken his Oath I confess indeed that Polydore and Stow have written so but you might easily have found that they write not true the one of them being a meer stranger in our State the other a man more to be commended for endeavour than for art King Iohn being in Normandy when his Brother died sent into England Hubert Arch-bishop of Canterbury William Marshal Earl of Strigvile and Geoffry Fitzpeter Lord Chief Justice who assembled the States of the Realm at Northampton and took of them an Oath of obedience to the new King Also King Henry the Third caused the Citizens of London the Guardians of the Cinque-ports and divers others to swear fealty to Prince Edward his son who being in Palestina when his Father died the Nobility and Prelates of the Realm assembled in the new Temple at London and did acknowledge him for their King And in like manner King Edward the Third took an Oath of all the Nobility of the Realm of faith after his death to Richard Prince of Wales and so did King Henry the first for his Daughter Mawde and her young son Henry After the death of King Henry the Fifth that Subjects did often swear allegeance before the Coronation and Oath of the King you had neither Countenance nor Conscience to deny but it was neither of these two which did restrain you it proceeded onely from the force of truth which will manifest it self whatsoever art we use to disguise it For otherwise what Countenance what Conscience had you to affirm that it is expresly noted by our English Historiographers That no Allegeance is due unto Kings before they be crowned Who are these Historiographers Where do they so write You that search every dusty corner of your Brains for a few ragged reasons to uphold your Heresie should not either have mentioned or omitted such pregnant proofs For in that you affirm and do not express them you condemn your self by your own silence If you mean that which you alleadge out of Polydore and Stowe That an Oath of fealty was never made before Coronation until the time of King Henry the Fifth it is neither true nor to any such sence If you mean that of Polydore in terming Henry the Fifth Prince and not King before he was crowned in writing also that the States did consult in Parliament Of creating a new King after the custom of their Ancestors It is a sleepie jeast to strain every word in such an Author to propriety of speech You might better have cited what certain Cities in France not long since alleadged for themselves That because they had not reputed Henry the Fourth for their King because they had not professed Alleageance unto him they were not to be adjudged Rebels Whereupon notwithstanding the chiefest Lawyers of our age did resolve that forasmuch as they were original Subjects even Subjects by birth they were Rebels in bearing Arms against their King although they had never professed alleageance And this is so evidently the Law of the Realm that it is presumption in us both in you to assay by your shallow Sophistry to obscure or impugn in me to endeavour by authorities and arguments to manifest or defend the same But the admission of the people you say hath often prevailed against

Duty That which you report also that Thomas Becket did write unto King Henry the Second importeth nothing else but an acknowledgment of Duty Remember said he the Confession which you made I cannot omit your description of the manner of the Coronation in England First you say the King is sworn then the Archbishop declareth to the people what he hath sworn and demandeth if they be content to submit themselves unto him under those conditions whereunto they consenting he putteth on the Royal Ornaments and then addeth the words of commission Stand and hold thy place and keep thy Oath And thus you have hammered out a formal Election supposing that you draw together the pieces of falshood so close that no man can perceive the s●am The truth is that King Henry the Fourth being not the nearest in Bloud to the inheritance of the Crown did countenance his violence with the election of the people not at his Coronation but in a Parliament that was holden before And therefore you do impudently abuse us first in joyning them together as one Act secondly by falsifying divers points in both lastly by insinuating that the same order was observed by other Kings The points which you falsifie are these The interrogation of the Archbishop to the people the absurd straining of these words Stand hold thy place to be a Commission the alleadging also out of Stow 1. That the Archbishop did read unto the people what the King was bound unto by Oath 2. That the Earl of Northumberland did shew a Ring unto the people that they might thereby see the Band whereby the King was bound unto them 3. That the King did pray that he might observe his promise In whi●h composition of Conceits you shew how active you are in counterfeiting any thing that may make to your purpose perswading your self that it is no fraud unto God to deceive the World in a lye for advantage King Edward the Fourth also because his Right was litigious and another was in possession of the Crown strengthened or rather countenanced his Title with the approbation of the People But where you write that at the Coronation of King Edward the Sixth Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth the consent and acceptation of the people was demanded First we have no cause to credit any thing that you say then although it be true yet not being done in Parliament it addeth no right unto the Prince but is onely a formality a circumstance onely of Ceremony and Order Hereupon you conclude that a King hath his authority by agreement and contract between him and the people insinuating thereby that he loseth the same if he either violate or neglect his word The contrary opinion that onely succession of Bloud maketh a King and that the consent of the people is nothing necessary you affirm to be absurd base and impious an unlearned fond and wicked assertion in flattery of Princes to the manifest ruine of Commonwealths and perverting of all Law Order and Reason I did always foresee that your impostumed stomach would belch forth some loathsome matter But whosoever shall compare this confident conclusion with the proofs that you have made he will rather judge you mad than unwise This bold blast upon grounds that are both foolish and false bewrayeth rather want than weakness of wits I am ashamed I should offer any further speech in so evident a truth but since I have undertaken to combate an Heresie since the matter is of so great consequence and import I purpose once again to give you a Gorge Learn then heavy-headed Cloisterer unable to manage these mysteries of State learn of me I say for I owe this duty to all Christians the Prophets the Apostles Christ himself hath taught us to be obedient to Princes though both Tyrants and Infidels This ought to stand with us for a thousand reasons to submit our selves to such Kings as it pleaseth God to send unto us without either judging or examining their qualities Their hearts are in Gods hand they do his service sometimes in preserving sometimes in punishing us they execute his judgment both ways in the same measure which he doth prescribe If they abuse any part of their power we do not excuse we do not extenuate it we do not exempt them from their punishment let them look unto it let them assuredly expect that God will dart his vengeance against them with a most stiff and dreadful arm In the mean season we must not oppose our selves otherwise than by humble suits and prayers acknowledging that those evils are always just for us to suffer which are many times unjust for them to do If we do otherwise if we break into tumult and disorder we resemble those Giants of whom the Poets write who making offer to scale the Skies and to pull Iupiter out of his Throne were overwhelmed in a moment with the Mountains which they had heaped together Believe it Cloisterer or ask any man who is both honest and wise and he will tell you It is a Rule in Reason a Tryal in Experience an Authority confirmed by the best That Rebellion produceth more horrible effects than either the tyranny or insufficiency of any Prince An Answer to the sixth Chapter whereof the title is What is due to onely Succession by Birth and what interest or right an Heir apparent hath to the Crown before he is crowned or admitted by the Commonwealth and how justly he may be put back if he hath not the parts requisite YOu begin after your manner with a carreer against Billay but because both I have not seen what he hath written and dare not credit what you report I will not set in foot between you In breaking from this you prefer Succession of Princes before free Election as well for other respects as for the pre-eminence of Ancestry in birth which is so much priviledged in the Scripture and yet not made so inviolable you say but upon just causes it might be inverted as it appeareth by the examples of Iacob Iudah and Solomon And this liberty you hold to be the principal remedy for such inconveniencies as do ensue of the course of Succession as if the next in birth be unable or pernicious to govern in which cases if he be not capable of directions and counsels you affirm that the remedy is to remove him And so you make Succession and Election the one to be a preservative to the other supposing that the difficulties of both are taken away First if ordinarily Succession taketh place then if upon occasion we give allowance to Election For the Prerogative of Birth as also for the special choice which God hath often made of the youngest I will remit my self to that which I have written before At once in those particular actions which God hath either done or by express Oracle commanded contrary to the general Laws which he hath given us as in the Robbery of the Egyptians the extirpation of the Amalekites