First Because the Exiling or Disinheriting the King's eldest Son indangers the King himself Secondly Because to compass the Exile compasseth the Death of the eldest Son by depriving him of the King's Protection and exposing him to Poison or Assassination of his Enemies and to compass to Disinherit him is a manifest design to destroy him without which his Inheritance cannot be taken from him as Matth. 21.38 They said amongst themselves this is the Heir come let us kill him and let us seize on his inheritance And they caught him and cast him out of the Vinyard and slew him Object 8 Obj. 8. The Son of a King born after he is King is to be prefer'd in Succession before the Son of a King born while he is Prince And of this there are many Examples as Henry the First being the youngest Son of William the Conqueror Born when a Prince and born when a King standing in Competition for the Crown of England against Robert Duke of Normandy his elder Brother made this one of his Objections That Robert was born when his Father was but a Duke but Henry was born when his Father was a King and therefore obtained the Kingdom against Robert his eldest Brother And it is recited by Grot. de Jur. Bel. Pac. p. 171. That the like passed in Persia between Cyrus and Arsica in Judea between Antipater the Son of Herod the Great and his Brother in Hungary when Geissa obtained the Kingdom in Germany between Otto the First and Henry though not without Arms and likewise the same Question was between Xerxes and his Brother Atabarzanes and between Artaxerxes Mnemon and Cyrus the Sons of Darius and Parisatis Artaxerxes being the elder but born during the Private fortune of Darius and the like happened between Bajazet and Zemez contending for the Turkish Empire and many others Answ These were put to the Tryal of Battel and for the greatest part the eldest Son had the Success but if it had been otherwise the Event of War is no Rule of Justice and if it had been without War yet where there is a standing Act of Parliament Judicandum est Legibus non Examplis And this Act of Parliament was made to prevent the present and all other Accidents which might happen to disturb the Peace of Succession of the Kingdom and raise Civil Wars which it could not do without all other Sons and Heirs to the eldest Son and there being no other Son mentioned in the Letter of the Statute but the eldest and not a word of Distinction whether born before or after the Father's obtaining the Kingdom Vbi lex non distinguit ibi nec nos distinguere debemus for then the same mischiefs would insue beforementioned of extending a Statute of Treason by Equity which leaves Treason arbitrary to every Judge who will assume to declare it beyond the Letter and to insert as many kinds of Sons and Heirs as he pleased which would make the Law and all the Care and Wisdom of it in ascertaining the Son Heir to be of no Effect and leave the Kingdom in a dangerous Condition that every Prince Married in his Father's life-time and having then some Children and after his Father's Death others might occasion a Civil War who should succeed to the Crown when he died Object 9 Obj. 9. The next Objection That the King 's eldest Son is not yet Declared Prince of Wales or Prince of the Scots The Original of this Title used to be given to the eldest Sons of the Kings of England was from Henry the Third who gave his eldest Son Edward who was afterward King Edward the First on his Marriage to Elianor the Daughter of Spain amongst other Principalities in France England and Ireland likewise that of Wales Hinc natum ut deinceps unusquisque Rex qui secutus est filium majorem natu principem Walliae facere consuevit And in continuance of this Custom Anno 1610. Prince Henry the eldest Son of King James was solemnly created Prince of Wales by his Father As to the Title designing the Prince of Scotland to be next Successor or Heir apparent it seems to have been by their Investiture of Cumberland for saith Buchanan Rer. Scot. lib. 6. p. 175. That Constantine the Third in the Tenth year of his Reign Milcolumbo proximo Regis filio Cumbriam donavit qui honos velut Augurium Argumentum erat eum proxime regnaturum Ac deinceps in proximis aliquot Regibus id fuisse observaturum manifesta adversus veterem Comitiorum rationem fraude quae omnem Liberorum susfragiorum vim prope tollerit non minus quà m Cossâ—à Caesaribus Designatio Constantine the Third in the Tenth year of his Reign gave Cumberland to Malcoliâ— the Son of the last King which Honour was as it were the Inauguration or Sign of him who was next to succeed in the Kingdom and was after observed by some of the next Kings to that end to take away by Fraud the free Election by Parliament no less than did the Designations of the Consuls by the Caesars and after p. 189. he sath That Kenneth the Third being King by Election of the People to make the Kingdom Hereditary to his own Son Malcolm finding it an Impediment in his way that his Brother Duffus his Son Malcolm Cumbriae tum praefectus erat quam Regionem Scoti beneficio Regum Anglorum it a tenebant ut Cumbriae Praefectura velut omen Regni esset atque ita jam per aliquot aetates observatum erat was then Governor of Cumberland which Region the Scots held by Gift from the Kings of England to that intent that the Presidentship of Cumberland should be for a Sign who should be next Successor to the Kingdom and so for divers Ages the same hath accordingly been observed he to inherit his own Poisoned his Brother's Son and p. 190. he saith Milcolumbus regis filius in natura adhuc ad rerum administrationem aetate Cumbriae praefectus et princeps Scotorum est Declaratus quod nomen perinde est Scotis atque apud Gallos Delfinus apud priores Romanorum Imperatores Caesar apud posterio res Rex Romanorum quibus omnibus Successor superiori Magistratui dari intelligitur Malcolm the King's Son in an unripe Age for Publick Affairs is declared President of Cumberland and Prince of the Scots which Name is with the Scots Equipollent to the Daulphin amongst the French to Caesar amongst the Ancient Romans and amongst the Modern to the King of the Romans by all which Titles the Successor to the Superiour Magistracy is understood but notwithstanding for the most part this hath been the Custom yet it hath been likewise often omitted and Admit it had not yet there being no Law requiring it there is no pretence that such Omissions makes any incapacity in the Heir to succeed at Common Law or to be within this Statute for the Statute making no Distinction between the King 's eldest Son when
both in England and Scotland sought to dishonour him with the Name of Nothus for by that name Buchanun Rerum Scot. 175. Stiles him and says Praerat omnibus Anglorum copiis Athelstanus Edwardi Nothus And in the same manner other Writers yet was neither the name nor the thing any bar of his Succession to the Kingdom but he was thereto prefer'd before his younger Brother Edmund whom Papal Laws made Legitimate and accordingly he was Crowned by Athelmus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury at Kingston upon Thames And proved after the most Heroick Victorious Prince that the English ever had before the Conquest for he conquered both the Danes and Scots confederated against him and Subdued the whole Island Edward the Son of Edgar Legitimate per Jus Coronae Ethestede for her excellent Beauty sirnamed the White was a Virgin and not Prohibited by Law of God for King Edgar to Marry but he neglected or despised Pontifical Ceremonies and begot on her without them his eldest Son Edward for which Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury injoyned him seven years Pennance which he underwent for the Fact After Edgar Married Elfrida the only Daughter and Heiress of Ordganus Duke of Devonshire with the Ceremonies of the Church and made her his Queen and likewise Contracted with her That her Children should be Heirs to the Crown and had Issue by her two Sons Edmund who died young and Ethelred who survived him Edgar dies Note here are all the Objections made against the succeeding to the Crown by Edward which are now made and more for here is an Heir by Marriage-Covenant opposed against the Natural Heir Queen Elfrid excepted against the Succession of Edward the eldest Son That his Mother was no Queen nor Wife Married according to the Ceremonies of the Church and that he was therefore Illegitimate That she her self was King Edgar's Queen and Wife whom he Married Solemnly according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church and that by his Marriage-Covenants he bound himself That her Children by him should be Successors to the Kingdom That therefore her Son was both the Legitimate Heir and Heir by Covenant and thereupon drew divers Lords to be of her Party and the two Sons are both produced before the Council assembled to demand their Rights But while the Council sate to Debate the same Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury came in with his Banner and Cross and not staying for dispute of the Title presented Prince Edward the eldest Son as next right Heir to the Crown and their lawful King and the Assembly consisting most of Clergy-Men drew the Approbation of the Rest whereupon Prince Edward was Admitted and Crowned King being but Twelve years old by Archbishop Dunstan at Kingston upon Thames Anno Dom. 975. and so continued till about Three years and Six Months after King Edward Hunting in the Isle of Purbeck not far from Corf Castle where his Mother-in-Law Queen Elfrid with his Brother Ethelred were then Residing he out of his Love to both would needs go to visit them where the cruel Step-mother out of Ambition to make her own Son King caused one to Stab him in the Back with a Knife as he was Drinking a cup of Wine on Horseback at his departing who feeling himself hurt set Spurs to his Horse thinking thereby to get to his Company but the wound being Mortal and he fainting through loss of so much Blood fell from his Horse and one foot being intangled in his Stirrup he was thereby ruefully dragged up and down and lastly left Dead at Corf Gate in Commiseration of which untimely Death he was ever afterward called Edward the Martyr On which may be noted 1. That notwithstanding the Mother of Edward was no Queen Notwithstanding she was never Contracted nor Married by the Rites and Ceremonies of the then Church Notwithstanding Elfrid was a Queen and solemnly Married by all those Rites and Ceremonies notwithstanding the Kingdom was by Marriage-Covenant setled on her Issue by King Edgar Notwithstanding Ethelred appeared with a Company of Lords Competitors Notwithstanding the accompanying of Edgar with Elfred was through Romish Superstition thought so unlawful as not to be Expiated under seven years Pennance Yet the same Archbishop Dunstan who imposed the same on the Father laid none on the Son but he and the Clergy declared him the Right and Lawful Heir by which they did implicitly confess and acknowledge That the Moral Law of God of Marriage and not any Ceremonial Law of Man is the immutable Law which ought to Govern the Succession of the Crown 2. The opinion of the Possession of the Crown to purge all Treason from him who commits it hath been a great incouragement to the committing of the same 3. That Princes disinheriting the Children of the first Wives and entailing their Kingdoms to the Children of the Second destroying thereby their own Houses 4. That none are more Cruel to the Children of the first Mothers than Step-mothers which it seems makes all Poets so out of Charity with them that they never mention them without some odious Epithet of Injustae mala dirae ferae terribiles Novercae and defame them with Stabbing Poisoning and Witchcraft Pocula si quando Saevae infecere Novercae Miscueruntque herbas non innoxia verba Virg. Georg. 2. When Cruel Step-mothers Poys'ning the Cup Add Herbs and Spells for Right Heirs to drink up I find but one kind of Step-mother excepted by Horace as not apt to be Guilty of these Practices which is she that neither brings Portion nor expects Jointure particularly of the Getick Women of whose Chastity and good Nature he thus writes Illic matre carentibus Privignis mulier temperat innocens Nec dotata regit virum Conjux nec infido fidit adultero Dos est magna parentium Virtus metuens alterius viri Certo foedere castitas Et peccare nefas aut pretium mori The innocent and kind Step-mothers there The Orphans Motherless to hurt forbear And not with Portions o're their Husbands rant Helpt by the Gay adulterous Gallant Vertue is Portion great and Chastity Strange man to touch more fearing than to Die 5. That where Marriage by the Ceremonial Laws of Men is preferr'd before a Marriage by the Moral Law of God this makes way for all Murders by Step-mothers of the Children of first Mothers of which see likewise the Example of Roxalana before related at large Lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 245. William the Conqueror succeeded to his Natural Fathers Dukedom his Mother never Married by a Priest in a Temple William the Conqueror was the Son of Rollo Duke of Normandy by Arlotte a mean Woman whom he made Sa Compaigne or Sociam Thalami without any Ceremonies of a Priest or Temple she was a Person how mean soever yet not Prohibited by the Law of God for him to Marry and though some slander her in hatred to her Son as if by some Lightness of hers all such as were of that Trade
making the Crown Hereditary to the Eldest Son answered ibid. Objections against the being of the King 's Eldest Son within the Statute of 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus Page 20. Obj. 1. That the Lady Mother was not a Queen ibid. Answ 1. The Statute is false Translated by the Lawyers and the Scripture false Translated by the Bishops in the word Queen ibid. Answ 2. Proved that the Lady Mother was Madam sa Compaign according to the Moral Law of God which is all and more than is required to be proved by the Statute ibid. Obj. 2. No Marriage according to the Mass-Book in the time of E. 3. nor by the Modern Common Prayer-Book or Book of Canons Page 23. Answ 1. No Marriage by any Book required by the Statute but only a Lady Companion according to the Moral Law of God Page 24. Answ 2. Marriage by the Common Prayer-Book not Necessary in a time of War when both Books of Common Prayer and of Canons were Prohibited and Abolished by the Power of the Sword ibid. Answ 3. The Legitimation of Children by the Law of God and of the Land ought not to be question'd after the Death of either Parent where not Judicially question'd and sentenced in their life-time Vid. Praeface Page 25. Answ 4. Not Necessary for a King who is Supreme Ordinary to Marry by the Common Prayer Book or Book of Canons Page 26. Answ 5. A King who is Supreme Ordinary may dispence with his own Canons and with any thing that is only Malum Prohibitum in his own Marriage but not with what is Malum in se by the Moral Law of God Page 28. Obj. 3. The Lady Mother was not HIS Companion which is the Article of Propriety required by the Statute Page 32. Answ She was HIS and he had the sole Propriety according to the Law of God and the Land Page 33. Obj. 4. There was no Marriage according to the Law of God Page 34. Answ 1. Certain Preparatory Considerations are laid down before the contrary is proved to this Negative By what Law and what Judges shall be judged what is the Law of God by which is after proved here was a Marriage according to the Law of God ib. Answ 2. Of the damnable Effects have followed by the Popish Prohibitions and Nulling of all Marriage not made by a Priest in a Temple Page 35. What is not Marriage by the Moral Law of God Page 39. What is not Matrimony by the Moral Law of God ibid. Answ 3. The Statute requires neither a King De Jure nor a Lady Companion De Jure nor a Son De Jure but only De Facto yet are they all here both De Jure and De Facto Page 40. Dangerous to leave the Succession of a Kingdom on so incertain a word as Lawful yet here both the King the Lady Companion and the Son are all Lawful ibid. Answ 4. A Lawful Successor may be of an unlawful Marriage Page 41. Obj. 5. The Lady Mother was not a Wife according to the Scripture Page 42. Answ 1. The Objection is false and it is after proved she was a Wife according to the Scripture ibid. Answ 2. The Statute requires no Wife according to Scripture but only a lawful Companion yet was she both a Wife and a lawful Wife according to Scripture as will hereafter be proved Page 43. Answ 3. The Bishops have falsly Translated the Scripture in all words relating to Marriage ibid. Of certain Differences between a Wife of the Bishop's making and a Wife of God's making Page 46. Obj. 6. There is no Bishop's Certificate to testifie the Marriage and Filiation Page 48. Answ The Statute requires no Certificate of either ibid. The Forms of Bishops Certificates Page 49. Their Original came from the Priests of Priapus Page 50. Of the Damnable Mischiefs insue from Tryal of Marriage and Filiation by Bishops Certificates ibid. The Certificates of Bishops inconsistent with the Right of Primogeniture Page 58. Of the General Custom of Nations of Successions to Kingdoms by Primogeniture and of the Mischiefs and Civil Wars commonly follow the disinheriting of the Eldest Son Page 62. What is Marriage and what Matrimony de Facto Page 66. What is Marriage De Jure according to the Law of God and of the Nations Page 67. Of the three Lawful Marriages amongst the Romans 1 Usu 2 Confarreatione 3 Coemptione Page 68. Of the three Lawful Marriages amongst the Hebrews 1 Copulatione 2 Coemptione 3 Instrumentis ibid. That Carnal knowledge Chastity and Childbirth between a Man and a Woman not prohibited by the Moral Law to Marry makes a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble without Banns Licence Priest Temple or any other Ceremony whatsoever Page 71. That the Marriage Coemptione Confarreatione or Instrumentis was not intended by Christ but only the Marriage Copulatione Page 86. An Epithalamium on the Marriage of Nature intended by Christ without a Priest or Temple Page 88. Obj. 7. The King 's Eldest Son is not the Heir intended by the Statute Page 90. Answ Proved he is the Heir both in the Letter and Intention of the Statute ibid. That to compass the Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's Eldest Son is High Treason Page 94. Obj. 8. By the Custom of Nations the Succession goes not to the Eldest Son born when the Father is only a Prince but to a younger Son born when he is a King ibid. Answ This Statute was made to prevent incertainty of this and other Customs and prevent all Cavils and Contentions about Succession by ascertaining the same to the Eldest Son Page 95. Obj. 9. The King 's Eldest Son is not yet declared Prince of Wales or of the Scots ibid. Answ The Statute requires no such thing Page 97. Obj. 10. Illegitimacy deprives of the benefit of the Statute ibid. Answ This Statute declares every Eldest Son of a King Legitimate and Heir to the Crown ibid. The Eldest Son of a King of Great Britain is Legitimate by his Birth-right per Jus Coronae ibid. Examples of the same Jus Coronae in other Nations Page 100. Examples of the same Jus Coronae in the Eldest Sons and Daughters of the Kings of England and Scotland who have thereby succeeded as Heirs to their Fathers Kingdoms on Marriages according to the Moral Law of God without the Ceremonies of a Priest or a Temple Page 102 103. That 't is High Treason for any Subject to slander the King 's Eldest Son with Illegitimacy Page 111. A Comparison of the Popish slanders of Illegitimacy against Queen Elizabeth and the King 's Eldest Son Page 112. A Comparison of the Popish slanders of Illegitimacy against King Edward the Sixth Queen Elizabeth the King 's Eldest Son and the Sons and Daughters of the whole Protestant Clergy Page 114. Of the insolent absurdity of Popish Laws Disinheriting the Lawful Sons of Kings according to the Law of God and inheriting the Bastards of Popes by the Law of the Devil
ubi Rex pervenerit ipsi sibi curatores Eligere posset That the King being under the Age of Fourteen Years Election should be made of a Guardian of great Estate and Wisdom who should be his Regent in the mean while and Administer his Affairs in the King's Name till he arrived at the Age of Fourteen and when he came to that Age he himself might choose his own Guardians Which Election of a Guardian must be intended to be by Parliament for it appears by the words That the Infant or Minor King must not nor is able to choose himself till he come to the Age of Fourteen And it is contrary to Reason that any other should be his own Judge to choose himself to have to himself to his own use the Custody of the Person of the King Dangerous to Commit the Guardianship of a Minor prince to the next Major in whom all his Subjects have an Interest And it would be very Dangerous to the Infant if he who is next Successor to the Crown should get the Custody of the Heir into his hands There is no Third Power can be therefore above Exception who ought to choose the Guardian of an Infant King but the Parliament And accordingly we find it to be the constant Practice of that Kingdom as appears Buchanan Lib. 19. p. 687. when it is said Sed cum homines usu rerum Edocti Perspicerint vix fieri posse ut in tanta fortunae inconstantia non aliquando in pueros aut alioqui Regno ineundo Impares haeredes jus summi Magistratus inciderit c. But when taught by Experience men saw that it could not be but in so great inconstancy of Fortune but the Right of the Supreme Magistracy might fall amongst Children or other Heirs unfit to Govern a Kingdom they Ordained That in the mean time one should be Elected Regent who Excell'd the rest in Estate and Counsel Guardians chosen by Parliament the only Security of Kings in Minority and our Ancestors following this way for the space of Six hundred Years have transmitted thereby the Kingdom safe to Posterity So Robert Bruce being dead Thomas Randolph Earl of Murray and Donald Earl of Mar Andrew Murray John Randolph Robert Stuart succeeded singly and sometimes more number are by Parliament chosen into that place So James II. being a child Alexander Leviston being of no Kin nor of the chief Rank of Nobility but only a Knight and of more repute for Prudence then Antient Descent was elected to be his Guardian Neither can there be alledged any want of persons of the Royal Stock to have been the cause of such choice for there was at that time John Kennedy chief of his Family and King James his Nephew by his Sister there were his Uncles James Kennedy Archbishop of St. Andrews Primate of the whole Kingdom in all kind of Vertue and his Brother born of the Kings Aunt Douglass Earl of Angus was not remote from the Kings Blood Archibald Earl of Douglas in Power almost equal to the King and superiour to any of the rest yet did none of these complain of any Injustice in the Parliament for making another choice and not long after four Guardians were given to James III. not taken for the Kindred but chosen by Parliament It was but of late that John Duke of Albin was sent for by the Nobility out of France to moderate the Affairs of Scotland James I. being then a child and was confirmed by a publick Act of Parliament Neither was it done because he was next of Kin for he had an Elder Brother called Alexander But James I. being absent Robert his Uncle ruled the Kingdom And with what Right Was he taken for nearness of Blood No he was chosen by the People Nor so neither How then was he created When Robert III. was so sick in body and mind that he was not able to discharge his Office he made his Brother Robert his Vice-Roy and commended his Children to him So his Brother starved to death David his Eldest Son and sought how to destroy likewise James his Younger had he not escaped by slight But he being now placed in possession of his Tyranny and his Brother dead with grief without Parliament or assent of the People he kept it and by force left it to his Son Mordach c. Buchanan proceeds p. 688. Quid enim minus justum esse poterat quam aetatem innoxiam atque infirmam ejus fidei committere qui pupilli sibi crediti mortem semper expectat optat What can be more injust then to commit the innocent and weak Age to one who always hopes for or wishes the death of the Pupil intrusted in his hands And after he saith Laodice the Queen of the Cappadoceans is related to have killed every one of her children as in order they arrived at fourteen years of age to gain thereby a little more time to reign If a Mother will destroy her Children to get the use of a little time what shall we think will their old Enemies dare yea will they not dare to do inflamed with the Brands of Covetousness to cruelty against a Child hindering their hopes of a perpetual Kingdom If this Example seems old and obscure or far-fetch'd I will add more clear and nearer home For who is so ignorant of things so lately acted as he knows not Galeacius Sfortia though at mans Estate though married and the Son in Law of a Potent King to be killed by Lodowick his Uncle Or to whom are the Calamities unknown which ensued that cruel Parricide the most beautiful Region of Italy brought almost to a Devastation the Sfortian Family The not abolishing Episcopal Laws which pretend to Illegitimate whom they please the sense of the Murder of Edward V. and his Brother so fruitful of valiant men destroyed Barbarians let into the most pleasant Country watered by Po. Against whose Rapine nothing was safe against whose Cruelty nothing was secure Who hath been born in the soil of Great Britain and hath not heard of the cruel Murder by Richard III. King of England of the Sons of his Brother Edward IV A great cause of the murder likewise of these Princes was that Papal and Episcopal Laws were not abolished which pretend to illegitimate whom they please Answ 5 Making a Kingdom hereditary to the eldest Son weakens not the Power of Parliaments And 5. as to the Reason against these Statutes which maketh the Crown hereditary to the eldest Son that the same enervate the strength of Parliaments and without a Contract made by every Prince with a Parliament no Government can be just in regard if he receives not the Kingdom by Contract he assumes it by Conquest which over a Free Nation is unjust To which is answered First that these Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which entail the Crown to the Eldest Son do no way weaken but confirm and establish the Power of Parliaments and
Exercise of the same for the Publick safety 1 In regard the Entail being made to the Eldest Son by Act of Parliament the same declares that what is given by Act of Parliament may be taken by Act of Parliament and that every former Act inacted may by a latter Act be repealed according to the known Rule Vnumquodque dissolvitur eodem modo quo conflatum est Secondly according to the General Examples of Acts of Parliament amongst which nothing is more common than for later Acts to change the Entails of the Crown made by former Acts. Thirdly This Power of Parliaments is expresly declared by Act of Parl. 13 El. 1. still in force by which it is enacted that to affirm that the Laws and Statutes do not bind the Right of the Crown and the Descent Limitation Inheritance and Governance thereof is High Treason Fourthly All the Reason alledged of the Antient Custom of New Election of the Successor on every Descent is only lest the Eldest Son should happen to be an Infant or otherwise unfit for Government that the Parliament might choose the fittest which here is satisfied in the Eldest Son who is above all exception known to be the fittest who can be chosen Fifthly though this reserve of Power remain naturally in Parliaments to repeal and change former Acts concerning Succession by new Acts when there is just and necessary cause yet it is necessary likewise there should be a praevious Act to mark out the Heir in whose name the Parliament shall be called to declare the Succession or Guardianship if he happen to be an Infant And what if after a King happens to die there happen a Rebellion or Invasion which makes it impossible to assemble a Parliament will it not be a great safety to the People that a standing Act of Parliament hath before hand appointed the Successor to take care of the Kingdoms till he can call a Parliament to give their assistance therein There is nothing therefore can be justly excepted against these two Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland for ascertaining by Law the Eldest Son to be Heir to the Crown The excellency of the two said Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which ascertain the Succession of the Crown to the Kings Eldest Son But it were a great unthankfulness to the Providence of God to undervalue such Laws whereby all Accidents are obviated Questions and Doubts resolved and Objections answered by so few words as two Lines in each and the Peace of Succession preserved in Great Britain for so many hundred years which in other Empires and Kingdoms cannot be effected without those horrid Murders of Younger Brothers by Elder or Elder Brothers by Younger of lineal Heirs by collateral or collateral Heirs by lineal of Sons by Fathers or of Fathers by Sons whereby Civil Wars Devastations and Ruines of Kingdoms have ensued and that the want of such Statutes or the Breach of them have been causes of these Evils and Enjoyment of them hath been the Cure will I hope appear in the Objections and Answers following Objections first against the not being of the Kings Eldest Son within these Statutes answered Object Obj. 1. That the Lady his Mother was not a Queen therefore the Kings Eldest Son is not within the Statute Answ Statute false translated in the word Queen Answ To this the answer is easie and clear that the word Madame sa Compaigne are falsly translated our Lady his Queen and ought to have been translated our Lady his Companion which is proved by the Reasons following 1. Because 't is manifest sa Compaigne signifies not the word Queen in specie but any Lady Companion in general 2. Because it is manifest the makers of this Act of Parliament intended not to restrain their several meaning onely to a Queen for they knew Royne was French for Queen as well as Roy for King and if they had intended so could have more certainly and easily said Compas le mort nostre Seignior le Roy sa Royne than Madame sa Compaigne 3. Because at the time of making this Statute the famous Black Prince being the Eldest Son to Edward III. was married to Joan Daughter to Edmund Earl of Kent and had Issue by her Richard of Bourdeaux after King of England and none doubts but it was the intention of the King Edward III. who passionately affected his Grandchild Richard that in case the Princes Wife should happen to die in his life time whereby she should not have been a Queen but that notwithstanding if the Black Prince had happened to have survived him which he did not and been King his Eldest Son Richard should have benefit of this Statute 4. It would have been made doubtful by the Bishops who usurped then the Papal Supremacy over Princes of giving or refusing to give them Coronation when they pleased whether the Kings Wife should be titled Queen if the Bishop refused her Coronation Ralph of Canterbury refuseth to Crown Adeliza Queen unless he should first discrown the King as Ralph Archbishop of Canterbury did to Adeliza the second Wife of H. I. unless the Kings would suffer him to pull off the Crown first from the Kings head and new Crown him in acknowledgment that the Supremacy of the Coronation Office belonged to Ralph the Archbishop Bak. Hist 43. Touching which Office of Coronation of Kings and Queens that it belongs to Parliaments and not to Bishops and that David himself was both crowned and anointed by his Parliament and not by the Priest is shewn lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 169 c. 5. The Law of Saxons and Scots that no Wife of a King should be called Queen Because the Title of Queen was then under Envy and doubtful whether not against the antient Law both of England and Scotland the same not appearing to have been repealed by any Act of Parliament Bak. Hist fol. 6. saith a Law was made by the West Saxons that no Wife of a King should be called a Queen fol. 8. that it was so rigorously observed that when Ethelwolph had married Judith the Beautiful Daughter of the Emperour Charles the Bald in honour of whom in his own Court he ever placed her in a Chair of State with all other Majestical Complements of a Queen contrary to the Law of the West Saxons made to avoid the great Expence of Treasure incident to great Titles and Ceremonies and against other inconveniences and so much displeased his Lords thereby that they were ready to have Deposed him but were prevented by his death not long after Buchanan Rev. Scot. 407. takes notice of this Law and says Saxones lege caverunt ne ulla deinceps Regis Vxor Regina vocaretur aut in sede honoris in publico Regi assideret And 406. mentions the like Law in Scotland Quas Reginas alii suo quisque sermone nos Regum uxores appellamus nec altioris fastigii nomen ullum in iis agnoscimus
therefore from such Wives of the Bishops making Injust for a Prince much more for a Judge or Bishop to force an Heir on another and such Judges of Marriage Filiation and Succession of the same making Libera nos Domine Iniquum est aliquem haeredem invito à Principe dari Craig Feâ—d 267. much more must it be for a Judge or Bishop Object 6. There is no Bishops Certificate of the Marriage and Filiation The Form of the Bishops Certificate of Marriage Cok. Lib. Intra fo 181. In Dower on a Nunquam fuit in legitimo Matrimonio copulata pleaded A Writ is sent to the Bishop to Certifie who returns this Certificate Et praedictus Episcopus per literas suas Patentes Clausas c. And the foresaid Bishop by his Letters Patents and Close hath Certified to the Justices here That by virtue of the foresaid Writ to him directed Convocating before him such of right as are to be Convocated hath diligently Enquired and Certified the truth of the matter That in the Chappel of B. in the County of G. in the Diocess of L. the Sixth day of Aug. An. 1606. Matrimony true pure and lawful per verba de praesenti according to the Form and Rites of the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England between the said A. B. and C. B. was solemnized by one Mr. A. U. Clork in the prosence of J.J. W.B. W. W. R.M. Witnesses in this part by the said Bishop examined and sworn and of other Witnesses then present the said A. B. and C. D. his Wife being of Lawful Age and of all other Matrimonial Contracts free cleer and clean as the Witnesses so sworn and examined believe The Form of the Bishops Certificate of Bastardy Rast Lib. Intra 105. b. On a Plea of Bastardy pleaded and a Writ to the Bishop to Certifie he makes a Return Venerabilibus viris Justiciarijs in Brevi Regio praesentibus annex specific permissione Divinâ C. Episcopus c. Certificamus quòd diligentem solertem fieri fecimus Inquisitionem de materijs in Brevi praedict ' Content ' per quam invenimus per Legitimas in hâc parte probationes alia in hâc parte Canonicè requisit ' quòd infra nominat ' N.H. de T. A. H. de P. J. H. de P. P. H. de P. Bastardi sunt quilibet corum Bastardus est prout praedict ' R. B. in Brevi praedict ' nominat ' placitando allegavit non Legitimè prout praedict ' N. A. J. E. placitando allegarunt hoc idem nobis satis constat We Certify That we have made diligent and cunning Inquisition of the Matters contain'd in the Writ by which we find by Lawful Proofs and other things Canonically in this behalf required that the within named N. H. of T. A. H. of P J.H. of P. and E. H. of P. are Bastards and every of them is a Bastard as the said R. H. in his Writ aforesaid named in Pleading hath alledg'd and not Legitimate as the said N. A. J. and E. have in Pleading alledg'd and this appears cleer enough to us Having shewn the Form of these Certificates what they are I now answer to the Objection 1. That the Letter of the Statute not mentioning either Marriage Legitimation Bishop or Certificate there needs no Proof or use of these at all but it is sufficient to prove a Lady Companion De Facto and an Eldest Son de Facto as mention'd in the Statute 2. Admit there was a Marriage or Legitimation to be proved the Statute doth not limit to any special manner of Probation but leaves liberty to make Probation qu cunque modo as in all other Matters 3. A Penal Statute cannot be extended by Equity to make Treason against an Heir so made only by Certificate of the Bishop feeing the Letter of the Statute makes not any such Treason and it would be of very dangerous Consequence to make any Intentional or Express Statute to give Power to any Bishop or Arch-Bishop to declare Kings or their Successors by Certificates under pain of Treason for then is the old Papal Power and greater than the Papal put into their hands of making and deposing them at their pleasure either under Pain of Excommunication or Treason and the power of Declaring or laying the Penalty of Treason in the Bishop would be greater than it was of Excommunication in the Pope 4. It is manifest that the Wise and Renowned King Edward the Third the Author of this Statute as hath been already shewn never intended they should have thereby any such Power or Pretence which though sufficient to answer the Objection I shall give some further Touch of the Mischiefs that insue by them to the People as well as to Princes Of the Mischiefs that insue of Bishops Certificates of Marriage and Filiation which Certifie other kinds of Heirs than the Heir intended by this Statute The Original of Certificates of Marriage came not from Christ but from the Priests of Priapus and the Devil 1. The Original of Bishops Certificates of Marriage and Filiation came not from Christ or his Apostles for we neither find that he or they ever Contracted or Married any Man and Woman nor gave Certificate of Marriage or Filiation themselves nor Precept to their Successors to do the same 2. The only Original of them which can be found came from the Priests of Priapus who forbid all Marriages except by the Ceremonies of a Priest in a Temple of which kind of unclean Priests I shall only here repeat a short Note before mentioned from Cornelius Agrippa de Van. Scient p. 738. in these words Sordidissimus Priapus pro Deo habitus hunc coluerunt primi illi Religionum artifices Chaldaei Aegyptii Assyrii Babylonii Arabes Scythae Aethiopes ac perinde tota Africa Asia Europa nec fas erat ullum Sacerdotem fiori qui Priapi sacris non crat initiatus Hic est ille Belphegor Idolum omnium antiquissimum quod est Chamos dictum à Chamo filio Noe. The filthy Priapus was reputed a God him worshipped the first Founders of superstiâ—ous Religions The Chaldaeans Egyptians Assyrians Babylonians Arabians Scythians Ethyopians and almost all Africa Asia and Europe neither was it lawful for any to be made a Priest unless he was first Initiated in the Sacred Rites of Priapus This is Belphegor of all other the most ancient Idol which is likewise call'd Chamos from Cham the Son of Noah That these Priests of Priapus who is the same with Baal-Peor and Milcom had their Doctrine of compelling Women and Men to be Married by Priests with Ceremonies from the Devil appears by what use they put it to Numb 25.1 And the People began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab and they call'd the People to the sacrifice of their Gods and the People did eat and bowed down to their Gods and Israel joyned himself to Baal Peor And in the Scripture Idolatry
were since called Harlots from her name Arlotte yet we find no proof of any Inchastity in her only she could Dance Ala mede de France and if they can prove she was Guilty of any worse and were an Harlot it only makes the President the stronger that the Law and Custom at that time and Countrey was that the Duke's eldest Son though by a Woman taken without any Ceremony of a Priest or Temple ought after the Death of the Duke succeed to the Dukedom neither was this way any other Law or Custom than what is already shewn to have been amongst the Princes of the Hebrews Greeks Romans and all other Nations not inslaved by Superstition to receive the Forms of Marriage and acknowledge the Supreme Jurisdiction of them to be in the Bishop of Rome or their own Prelates or Pontiffs by which Examples it appears That by the Brittish Scottish and Norman Laws the eldest Sons of Kings by Women not Prohibited to be Married by the Law of God though not Joyned by a Priest in a Temple or any other Episcopal Ceremony yet by Right of Primogeniture they succeeded in the Governments of their Fathers Dominions It will be asked how then came the ancient Law of God and the Land to be changed concerning these matters of Marriage Filiation and Succession and the Jurisdiction to be got or pretended to be in Episcopal hands to Judge and Dispose of Marriage Filiation and Successions both to the Crown and Lay-Inheritances according to Canonical Laws and not the Laws of God nor the Land To which is answered Hugh Capet an Usurper of the French Crown to curry favour with the Pope first disinherited natural Children That as to Normandy and other the English Dominions after acquired in France as Bodin says fol. 741. Hugh Capet was the first that made a Law in France That natural Sons that is to say such whose Parents were not Married by the Popish Ceremonies of a Priest in a Temple should not be Heirs nor succeed to the Kingdom And at last strain'd his Law to that Degree of unnatural Cruelty and Folly that it was Enacted That natural Children should not be accounted natural Children which Nonsence in that time of Popery was not only followed by the French but imitated to get Money by the English and Scotish Ecclesiastical and Common Lawyers who as hath been already shewn would not admit natural Children to be Sib Kin of Consanguinity nor Children to the Father who begot or the Mother who bare them as if it had been in the Power of Hugh Capet and them to overthrow or change the Laws of God and Nature Prohibition of Marriage Sans Ceremony a French Toy to disinherit all Protestant Children So likewise by a French Decree as saith Everard p. 24. All Children born in Marriages not Blessed by a Romish Priest are made incapable to succeed to the goods of Father or Mother the Law of Capet was plotted by the French Bishops to get themselves Supremacy of disposing the French Crown which foundation of Power they commonly got from Usurpers to the intent that by their Ecclesiastical pretence of Authority they might protect a false Title and disinherit the true Heirs of the Blood Heylin in his Geography p. 186. saith That Popes strengthen themselves by unlawful Marriages of Princes and not by lawful and p. 101. Popes strengthen themselves by unlawful Marriages and Successions of Princes and not by lawful That Hugh Capet being a Prince of a strange Blood was hoysâ—d up by the People to the Prejudice of Charles of Lorrain the true Heir of France as Brother to Lotherius and Uncle to Lodovicus the last King of the Line of Pepin And p. 129. he saith The occasion why Capet was chosen and Charles of Lorain refused was this Charles Son to Lewis the Fourth King of France being left to the courtesie of his Brother and by him not regarded was by Otho the Emperor invested in the Dutchy of Lorain Anno 984. which containeth one Marquisate five Earldoms and divers Baronies The eldest Son likewise of Lorain is intitled Prince of Barry for which cause that he received Lorain from the Emperor Charles shewed himself so alienated from the French and wedded to the Germans that the French after the Death of his Cousin Lewis the First rejected him and chose Hugh Capet for their King This Charles had one Son named Otho and one Daughter called Hermingrade from her descended Isabel Wife to Phillip the Second uniting the Bloods of Pepin and Capet to the great content of her Grandchild St. Lewis who being a Man of a very tender Conscience is said never to have Joyed in the Crown of France till it was proved that by the Mothers side he was the right Heir of Charles of Lorain whom Hugh Capet had so unjustly dispossessed French and Popish Laws of Marriage seek to destroy all English Heirs and the Protestant Religion So it appears this French Law against Natural Sons was made to disinherit the true Heirs of the Royal Blood of France and to inherit the Certificate Heirs of the French Bishops and the other French Law mentioned against all Succession of the Children whose Parents at their Marriage received not the Benediction of a Romish Priest was made on Design to disinherit all Protestant Children The Law of Theodora against Natural Heirs was to Disinherit the true and Inherit adulterous Heirs The Law of Trent nulling all Marriages without a Priest and Witnesses was to set to Sale Community of Women to raise Rents out of Stews to lay a Tribute on Marriage and inslave the Successions of Kingdoms and private Patrimonies to the will of Popes and Bishops Are there any Degenerous English so much Frenchified as will impose French Laws of Succession on the English Crown Capet's Law not to be compared with the Law of Edw. the 3d. Shall Hugh Capet's Laws dare to contend with this Law of Edward the Third who beat and Conquered the greatest Navies and Armies of France and in tryal by Battel at Cressey proved his Right better to the Title of King of France than the Heir of Capet his and had the same Heir of Capet taken Prisoner in Battel by the Black Prince the Heir of this Statute Are there any so false Protestants as to introduce such Popish Laws as disinherit all Protestant Children Are there any so prophane Christians as will prefer the Ceremonial Laws of Men above the Moral Laws of God It hath been shewn thus far by the Examples of so many Kings of this Island of Great Britain that their Legitimation and Succession thereby to the Crown were by the Moral Law of God and not by the Ceremonial Laws of Romish or Brittish Bishops and none dared in Great Britain though they did in France assume the Supremacy of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction above the Royal and Parliamentary in Declaring the Successors of the Crown or if they did they were overthrown in like manner may
Answ 'T is acknowledged if the Declaration were to be by the Parliament Sole without the King it might possible make a Kingdom Elective but where by Law the King hath a Negative and the Declaration is not made without his Consent it is otherwise for it is sufficient to make a Kingdom Hereditary if the Law make it descendible to the King's Heirs in Case it be not otherwise by the King himself and Parliament actually disposed of which is seldom done and in Cases of Necessity But yet are they not disabled of the Power to do it when they think necessary as a private Inheritance doth not therefore cease to be Hereditary because the Owner hath Power to Give Sell Alien or otherwise dispose of it 't is sufficient if by Law it descend to his own Heirs unless he Actually happen according to Law to dispose of it from them Obj. 2. Declarations by Act of Parliament are in vain Because Acts of Precedent Parliaments cannot bind the Power of a subsequent Parliament which is shewn by divers Examples Cok. 4 Part. fol. 42. And Grotius speaks to the same intent That Kings Predecessors cannot bind Kings Successors Est autem causa Successionis non subjecta Regi nunc regnanti quod inde apparet quod Rex nunc regnans nulla lege obligare potest Successorem Successio enim Imperii non est de Jure Imperii ac proinde mansit in statn naturali quo nulla erat Jurisdictio Grot. de Jure Bell. Pacis lib. 2. cap. 7. p. 171. That a cause of Succession is not subject to the King now Reigning appears from this that a King now Reigning can by no Law bind his Successor for the Succession to Empire is not of the Right of Empire But the same remains in the state of Nature wherein there was no Jurisdiction Answ Though a King and Parliament present by declaring a Successor cannot bind a Parliament future but they may again Repeal or Abrogate such present Act of Declaration yet doth it not follow that the present Act of Declaration is vain and of no use For first Then by the same Reason it might be said that Magna Charta and the Petition of Right And all the Acts of Parliament we have are vain and of no use because future Parliaments have Power to repeal them notwithstanding which it is manifest such an Act of Declaration would be of great Use and Benefit Secondly An Act though repealable is not vain because such an Act cannot pass without the Major number of Votes which will be an Incouragement to the major number to continue their indeavour to preserve And a Discouragement to the minor part in another Parliament to attempt to repeal Thirdly Because succeeding Parliaments have a Reverence to preceding and though they have Power to repeal yet do they not use to repeal to the utmost of their Power nor can a former Act be repealed but by another Parliament which if a Protestant Successor is Declared must be called by him and he hath then a sufficient Legal Power to Exclude so far Papists from Elections of Members of Parliament as probably they will have no Power to repeal former Protestant Acts. Fourthly Subsequent Parliaments cannot repeal the Act of a Precedent quoad praeterita for which reason the whole People will act with far greater Courage both in Peace and War in Execution of whatsoever they have a standing Act of Parliament to protect them than where there is none Fifthly Such an Act doth leave the Successor and his Parliament in a Posture and Possession of Arms Lawfully to defend his own Right and the Protestant Religion both against Secret Massacres and Open Rebellions and Invasions by Papists Object 3. Acts of Parliament cannot bind the Power of the Sword or Armies in the Field Answ Though they canot bind such as are Actually Convented without raising other Armies against them Prevents though it binds not the Power of the Sword yet they may take ways both to prevent their Convention and to raise other Armies against them if Convenient and the Success must be left to God Object 4. That a Successor Declared Declaring incites not a Lineal but a Collateral Heir to Rebel and not an eldest Son but a younger wrongfully present before him may prove Rebellious or Disobedient Answ This Objection is made 28 H. 8. cap. 7. But it makes no Danger of it except only in Case it should happen to be of a Collateral Heir when the King should have no Lineal Heir of his Body Concerning which Collateral Heir only and not his Lineal These are the words of the Statute by way of Petition from the Parliament to the King And if your Grace afore it may be certainly known whether ye shall have Heirs or no should suddenly name or declare any Person or Persons to succeed after your Decease and for lack of Heirs of your Body lawfully begotten into the Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of this Realm then it is to be doubted that such Persons that should be named might happen to take great heart and Courage and by Presumption fall into inobedience and Rebellion by Occasion of which Premisses great Divisions and Dissentions may be and is very likely to Arise and Spring in this Realm to the great Peril and Destruction of us Your Majesties most humble and obedient Subjects and of all our Posterities Whereby it appears This Statute is only afraid of Declaring Collateral Heirs If there should be no Lineal Heir of the Body or they should fail In like manner Queen Elizabeth having no Lineal Heir of her Body was afraid to declare the Collateral But she declared the Natural Heirs of her Body should Succeed as appears 13 Eliz. 1. which are the next Lineal and not Collateral Heirs And the Example of Christian Princes in like manner hath been never to Scruple the Natural affection of their own Natural eldest Sons to declare them Successor after their Death for that gives them no Greater present Power than they had before The Heir as is said Gal. 4.1 Differeth nothing from a Servant So Edward the Third did not doubt to Declare his Eldest Son the Famous Black Prince his Successor by the General name of his Eldest Son in this Statute nor likewise by making him Prince of Wales to declare him by name his Heir Apparent and Successor nor did he ever the less Trust him with the Command of great Armies in France with whom he was Victorious yet did the Son so declared never presume to any higher Title than Prince of Wales nor Motto than Ich Dien I serve as if he studied how to testifie his Obedience to God and his Father and to shew that the Heir differeth nothing from a Servant In like manner did the Old Roman Emperors declare their Eldest Sons Caesars and Principes Juventis The Modern Emperors theirs Kings of the Romans The Kings of England theirs Princes of Wales The Kings of Scotland
theirs Princes of the Scots The French Kings theirs Dauphins with so little doubt of Danger thereby that they rather look on the same as the greatest Security of themselves their Families and Kingdoms to have their Eldest Sons declared Successors in their Life-time but always as is said this is true only where the Eldest Sons are declared and not where contrary to the order of Nature Younger Sons or Collateral Heirs are prefer'd before them or to disherit them Object 5. The Ottoman Emperors never declare a Successor Answ They are ill Presidents to be followed for the not declaring of a Successor causeth all those Bloody Butcheries of Fathers of their own Sons And Brothers one of another and gives the Janizaries Power to sell the Empire to that Son or Brother who will give most Money for the same which the Emperors would gladly reform if they were able and declare their Successors as other Princes do were they not over-power'd by their own Slaves as appears Turk Hist 479. Selymus The Ottoman Emperors why they declared no Successors a Younger Son of Bajazet the Second was made by his Father Governor of the Kingdom of Trapezond and Married without his Fathers liking the Daughter of Mahometes a mighty King of the Tartars called Precopenses Selymus by the assistance of his Father-in-Law provided a great Fleet and Army Pretending but not Intending War on Hungary Bajazet receiving Advertisement of Selymus his Army and that he had left Trapezond and was come over into Europe suspecting his Design notwithstanding his Pretences to be against himself yet not seeming to take notice thereof sends Embassadors to disswade him from the Hungarian War and to perswade him to return peaceably to his former Government but without effect for he continues his March onwards towards his Father In the mean time Bajazet moved the rather with the fear of Selymus resolved on that which he had long time in his Mind deeply Consider'd in regard he was aged and sickly to resign the Empire to Achomates his eldest Son and proposeth the same to the Soldiers but they being Corrupted before with Money by Selymus Cunningly seeming to commend Achomates yet would neither yield that Bajazet should resign or nominate him for his Successor And the chief Reasons they alleadged were That the same was neither according to the Custom of the Ottoman Kings nor for the behoof of the Men of War who should thereby be defrauded of the Rewards usually granted unto them during the time of vacancy of the Empire arising from the Spoil taking of them who are of Religions different from the Turks for it is a Custom that immediately on the Death of the Turkish Emperors all the Jews and Christians which dwell at Constantinople Pera Hadrianople Thessalonica and Prusa especially Merchants Exposed unto the Injuries of the Turks are by the Janizaries and other Soldiers of the Court spoiled of all their Wares and Goods and became unto them a Prey neither will they give their Oath of Allegiance unto the new Emperor until he grant them their Prey and Swear by his Head to Pardon all their Outrages before Committed When Bajazet saw his Men of War generally to oppose themselves against the Nomination of his Successor he tryed what Money would do with them and promise them Five hundred Thousand Duckets if they would stand favourable to Achomates and accept him for their Soveraign but he could not move them for they assured themselves of greater Rewards in Pay and Plunder from Selymus So with Grief and Patience he put up the Matter hoping for a fitter Opportunity to effect what he desired Selymus in the mean time under divers pretences marcheth on towards his Father and Corrupted the greatest part of his Council with Money and great Promises to betray him and advance Selymus to the Empire only Cherseogleson and old faithful Bassa adviseth Bajazet to Chastise the Rebellion of his unnatural younger Son and to give him Battel wherein Selymus was overthrown and the greatest part of his Army Slain Achomates hearing of all the trouble had happened between his Father and Brother Selymus writes to him desiring him to dispatch his long Determin'd and Promised Resignation of the Empire Bajazet of himself still continued desirous of the Translating the Empire to Achomates and making no great Secret of it Commanded Galleys to be provided to Transport Achomates for that end from Scutari where he then was to Constantinople but the Bassa's and Souldiers Corrupted by Selymus's Money would not suffer him whereupon he writes to Achomates how the matter stood and that he should therefore return from Scutari to his old Charge of Amasia until he might with bounty win the Minds of the Souldiers and great Men to effect his advancement with less Danger Achomates thus deceived of his hopes Complained of his Father how he had deceived him and made him a By-word and Laughing-stock to the World and meditating either Revenge or Defence against his Brother raiseth an Army and on Contumacy when Commanded to Disband is by the Incitation of Selymus with his Party proclaimed Traitor by his Father and Bajazet is so over-persuaded by the Conspirators That he sends home for his younger traiterous Son Selymus Pardons him and makes him General of his Armies against Achomates the elder Son Selymus having received the Army they Corrupted by him Proclaim him Emperor Selymus thereupon Poisons his Aged Father Bajazet being almost Fourscore years of Age and Murders his Brothers and Five of his eldest Brother's Sons From whence may be observed 1. The Great Error of Bajazet who gave his younger Son Selymus a Kingdom and so great Power with it that he was able to be a Competitor against his eldest Son and to raise a Rebellion against himself which is Inconsistent with the Right of Primogeniture and Divides the Empire into many Empires 2. That Excessive Treasure given to a younger Brother gives him Power to Corrupt both the Council and Army of his Father who gave it him 3. Bajazet by setting the younger Son in Contention with he eldest he lost the Fidelity of both and was destroyed between them 4. He did very imprudently to promise his eldest Son the Resignation of the Empire and ought only to have declared him Successor after his Death 1 Bajazet by preferring his younger Son before his eldest exposed him to be Murdered unless he took Arms in defence of his Life but more Imprudently to break his Promise to him and thereby to Expose him a Publick Laughing-stock to the World and a certain mark to be Murdered by his Brother Selymus unless he took Arms in his own Defence to prevent it 5. That by probabillity if he could have effected the Declaring of his eldest Son Successor and given only Moderate Portions to his younger Sons as the Chynoys and Aethiopians Emperors gives theirs such miserable Murders might not have fallen on himself his Sons and Nephews The like Destruction is before observed to have
of her own Body but while there was a possibility she might she Declared by 13 Eliz. 1. They should be her Successor and Enacts a Penalty of High Treason against those who should affirm the contrary 3. That Queen Elizabeth doth not think it fit that her Legitimation should be Judged by Popish Laws as she could expect no other would endeavour to be done if she permitted a Contest between her and a Papist What Shall a Virgin Queen be Judged by Laws which as is already shewn came from the Priests of Priapus and Venus Shall a Protestant Queen be Judged and Shot to Death by the Cannons and Constitutions of the Strumpets Theodora Marozia and the Whore of Babylon No she was Judged Legitimate by the Holy Moral Law of God and the Protestant Religion to be Successor to her Natural Father and though he forsook her God took her up and by his assistance the Gates of Hell were not able to prevail against the truth of the same And let any Papist now if he can shew any Reason or Scripture why he should with foul mouth asperse the Legitimation of King Edward the Sixth or Queen Elizabeth or the Kings Eldest Son or why the latter ought not to be Successor as well as was the former and Print the same with his Name subscribed And no question there are Protestants enough will answer him Yea The Interest of a Prince Legitimate by the Moral Law of God and the Protestant Religion to maintain both against Popish Ceremony and Superstition let him prove if he can That 't is not only the Greatest Honour to a Protestant Prince himself but a great Mercy and Providence of God to a Protestant People to offer them such a Prince whom he hath made Legitimate by his own Holy Law and the Protestant Religion and permitted him to be Declared Illegitimate by the Papist unholy Law and Superstition and thereby laid on him the highest Obligation of his own Interest to maintain the Holy Moral Law of God and Protestant Religion against the Popish Ceremonial Laws and Superstition and far worse it had been for the Protestants if Queen Elizabeth had not been made Illegitimate by the Papists then that she was To Conclude a full answer hath been therefore already given the Objection That Queen Elizabeth never refused to Declare a Protestant and Lieal Successor but only such as were either Papist or Collateral Obj. 7. A Protestant Successor will not be equal to Papists who are not only a Considerable but a great and potent Party of the People of the Three Kingdoms Answ This is fully answered already before Lib. 2. p. 401 402 403 c. where it is shewn to be the Interest of the Protestant Religion to abolish all Laws of Recusancy equally which are Penal to the Consciences either of Protestants or Papists except as to Mass Idols and Popish Priests This is likewise answered in the following Reasons wherein it is shewn That not only Protestants but Papists themselves except Popish Priests may hope for greater Security and Happiness from a Protestant Successor than they ever had or 't is possible for them to have from Papist Predecessors or Successors to which I therefore desire to refer Reasons for Declaring a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament HAving answered all Objections against Declaring of a Protestant Successor I shall now only add some few Reasons for the same arising from the Great and manifold Dangers caused by the Neglect 1. Danger to the Conscience of a Prince 1. The first Danger is to the Conscience of a Prince when he shall give Account to God of the Neglect of so great a Duty to him and so great a Trust reposed in him by the People as to which There is none doubts but every private Father is by his Duty to God bound while it shall please God to lend him Life and Health and before Death with a sudden Arrest hurry him hence to give an account of his Stewardship to make Provision according to his Power for the leaving his Family in Peace after his Decease much more it is the Duty of all Princes who ought to be the Publick Father of their Countries who have so great Account to Give not only for their own Families but for Nations and Kingdoms and all the Wars Murders Massacres and Devastations which by their default shall happen after their Death To provide while God gives them Life and Health for prevention of such Calamities amongst their People and for the Peace of Succession in the Government over them And in the Statute of 35 H. 8. cap. 1. This great Trust Reposed in the King by the People is exprest a Chief Consideration of Declaring a Successor and setling the Succession of the Crown by King and Parliament in these words in the Preamble of the Act viz. Forasmuch as our most Dread Soveraign Lord the King upon good and just Grounds and Causes Intendeth by God's Grace to make a Voyage Royal in his most Royal Person into the Realm of France against his ancient Enemy the French King his Highness most Prudently and Wisely Considering and Calling to his Remembrance how this Realm standeth at this present time in the Case of Succession and poising and weighing further in himself the great Trust and Confidence that his Loving Subjects have had and have in him c. And to the Intent his Majestie 's Disposition and Mind therein should be openly Declared and manifestly known and Notified as well to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal as to all other his Loving and Obedient Subjects of this Realm to the Intent of their Assent and Consent might appear to Concur with thus far as followeth of his Majestie 's Declaration in the behalf and thereupon makes Provision for the Succession of the Crown in the same Act. In like manner it is provided by the Law of Persia as saith Herod Lib. 7. That whensoever the King goeth to War abroad he ought first to Declare his Successor that he may leave Peace at home 2. Danger by the incertainty of the Laws of Succession of the Crown 2. The Danger caused by Incertainty of the Laws of Succession of the Crown and that this is a Great Danger and necessary to be Remedied by a Declaration by King and Parliament appears likewise by the Preamble of the Statute of 25 H. 8. cap. 22. in these words viz. Wherefore we your said most humble and Obedient Subjects in this present Parliament Assembled calling to our Remembrance the great Divisions which in time passed have been in this Realm by reason of several Titles pretended to the Imperial Crown of the same which sometime and for the most part insued by Reason of Ambiguity and Doubts then not so perfectly Declared but that men might upon froward intents expound them to every man's sinister Appetite and Affection after their Sons Contrary to the Right Legalty of the Succession and Posterity of the Lawful Kings and
is not always necessary he should be his first begotten Son for the Second after the Death of the first begotten without Issue is Fitz-Eigne with the Statute Et sic de caeteris which doth implicitly seem to affirm That till the Issue of the Eldest Son fails the second Son shall not Succeed by this Statute which implicitly prefers the Nephews in Successions before the Uncle but he shewing no Authority therein but his own and that only implicit and not Express and the Common Law and Customs of the Crown being very incertain obscure and as often broken as kept when not Confirmed by Act of Parliament And King Edward himself the Wife Author of this Act when the Black Prince Died and left his Eldest Son Richard of Bindeax who was after R. 2. Doubting of the certainty of the Law in the Point did as the wisest way procure Richard to be Declared Successor by Act of Parliament in his Life-time to secure him against his Uncles Tâ—â—â—aw of Eâ—… not clear in point of Succession of the Crown between Nephew and Uncle where the Father dies before the Grandfather The certainty of the Law of England therefore may be not without Cause doubted in this Point of Succession between Nephew and Uncle and Danger there may be lest the incertainty of the same give the same Pretences to create Civil Wars here as it doth in other Countries unless prevented by an Act of Parliament as in Scotland Vt filio ante patrem Defuncto Nepos Avo Subrogaretur 8. Danger without Assent of the People Danger if the Successor assume the Crown without the Assent of the People by their Representative in Parliament the Right of a Successor is not here Disputed nor the Law whether he is King before Coronation or not until Contract with his Parliament and Coronation received from them Highest a Successor can say is only as Paul saith 1 Cor. 10.23 All things are lawful for me but all things are not expedient All things are lawful for me but all things edifie not Though the manner whereby a Successor ascends the Throne may be lawful yet may it not be Expedient neither may it Edifie the Throne H. 8. was a King of great Courage and Wisdom and doubted not the Right of him and his Posterity to the Crown Yea though he had more than any other King Power granted him by Act of Parliament himself to Declare his own Successor either by his Letters Patents or last Will yet he shewed therein his great Wisdom and Moderation and would not do it without Assent of his Subjects as appears in the already mentioned Statute 35 H. 8. cap. 1. in these words viz. And albeit that the King 's most Excellent Majesty for default of such Heirs as are Inheritable by the said Act might by the Authority of the said Act give and dispose the said Imperial Crown and other the Premisses by his Letters Patents under his Great Seal or by his Last Will in Writing Signed with his most gracious Hand to any Person or Persons of such Estate therein as should please his Highness to Limit and Appoint Yet to the Intent that his Majestie 's Disposition and Mind therein should be openly Declared and Manifestly known and notified as well to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal as to all other his Loving and Obedient Subjects of this his Realm to the intent that their ASSENT and CONSENT might appear to Concur with thus far as followeth of his Majestie 's Declaration in this behalf For so Wise a King well know that let the Right of a Successor be what it will yet if he lose the Love of his People which cannot be obtained without their Assent and Consent he loseth the Chief Defence under God of that and all other Right he hath if therefore a Successor is Declared by Act of Parliament so great a Danger is avoided of not having the Assent and Consent of his Subjects seeing such an Act of Parliament cannot be without the Assent and Consent of the major part of the People included in the plurality of Votes of their Representative 9. Danger of assuming the Crown by a Papist The next great Danger is The assuming of the Crown by Force by a Papist Successor if not prevented by a Declaration of a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament That a Papist Successor is most Dangerous to all Lay-Papists themselves and that they may Live far more Happy under a Protestant than one of their own Religion A Distinction ought to be made between Lay-Papists and Papist Priests Both Religion Justice and Mercy ingage all those who are affected with the least of any of them to put a great difference betwixt the Deceived and Deceivers and betwixt the Blind and those who mislead them to fall into the Ditch A Distinction is therefore necessary to be made by all Protestants between the Lay Papist and the Papist Priest Mercy is to be shewn the one and Justice the other And if this just Course had been used from the Beginning of the Reformation that no Penal Statute had been made against the Lay-Papists but only against the Papist Priests The Protestant cannot be secure unless the Lay Papist be likewise secure from Penal Laws against Conscience No Bishop Bencroft under pretence of maintaining the Dominicans against the Jesuits and Regulars against Seculars had been able to maintain Legions of both in Secret to Destroy the Protestants in their own Land nor under the blind name of Recusants to turn the edge of all the Penal Laws pretending to be made against Papists to cut off the Protestants And the Sacrament of the Paschal Lamb to be a Destruction to the Israelites and a Passover to the Egyptians those Penal Laws being pursued with the highest Rigour against the Protestants but came not near the Papists Dwellings or if they did they took more easie Pardons from the Exchequer than from the Pope So if the late Act concerning Oaths and Sacraments had been Restrained only to Papists Protestants had not suffered in so high a Degree as now they do But I pass from what is past to what is future to shew what Mischiefs the Papists themselves are to expect from a Papist Successor and what benefit from a Protestant 1. The first Mischiefs they will meet with in a Papist Successor is a most miserable one take what Covenant what Vow what Promise what Oath they can from him yea an Hundred Oaths his Conscience cannot be bound with any of them and the Catholicks themselves shall take as little hold of his Catholick Faith as the most of those whom they think or call Hereticks As for Example William the Conqueror was a Papist and is mentioned Dan. Hist 36. to get Assistance of the King of France who was then young in his Design for England William the Conqueror a Papist King forswore himself to Papist Subjects promised if he obtained the Kingdom to hold it
his whole Reign after the same was a perpetual Contention by him to raise his Prerogative to an Arbitrary Power Destructive to all Liberty and Propriety of his Subjects which he had Confirmed to them by Oath Charter and Act of Parliament and instead of asking a Dispensation of the Pope to Levy Taxes on the Subjects without their Consent in Parliament he took the easier way and dispensed with the Pope to Levy on them what he would and give him a share So the poor Subjects paid double whereas if they had paid only to the Pope or only to the King they had only born a single burden but now they Complained as the History mentioneth Shepheard and Woolf confederated to share the Sheep That the Shepheard and the Woolf Confederated both to destroy the Sheep and the Pope continually levied so many insupportable Taxes on them to maintain his Wars against the Emperor that both Clergy and Layety address'd their heavy Complaints of him to the King himself but the King was so far from relieving them that he offer'd the Pope's Legat to deliver up to him the Chief Opposers who now by the King's Animation grew more insolent to oppress them than before Henry the 3d. being dead his Son Edward the First Succeeded him a King Renowned for his Valour and Wisdom against his Enemies yet Dissentions with his Subjects hindred that Valour and from extending themselves to that degree of Glory they might have otherwise arrived neither is it only Valour and Wisdom unless Justice is likewise joyned can make a People happy in their Prince or himself happy in them Edward the First a Papist King forswore himself to his Papist Subjects He likewise took the same Oath for preservation of Laws and Liberties as his Father and Grandfather had done but whether seduced by their Example or their Evil Counsellors as he had imitated them in the taking so likewise did he in the Violation of his Oath for as his Father had done before him notwithstanding his Oath and Complaints by his Subjects of the Pope's oppressions he and the Pope as his Father had done like the Shepheard and the Woolf agreed to divide the spoil of the Flock between them the Pope therefore granted the King the Tenth of all the Churches of England and the King grants the Pope to have the first fruits of those Churches Dan. Hist 202. This Edward likewise after many Contests wanting Money in the 25th year of his Reign called a Parliament wherein with much ado he granted the Confirmation of the two Charters of Magna Charta and Charta Forrestae and that with the omission of the Clause of Salvo Jure Coronae Nostrae such another Clause as is Aut per Legem terrae which the King laboured much to have inserted but the People would by no means agree he therefore Confirmed them absolutely and Enacts further That All Arch-Bishops and Bishops shall Pronounce the Sentence of Excommunication against all those that by Word Deed or Counsel do contrary to the aforesaid Charters or that in any Point break or undo the same and that the said Curses be twice a year Denounced and Published by the Prelates aforesaid And if the said Prelates or any of them be Remiss in Denunciation of the said Sentences the Archbishop of Canterbury and York for the time being shall Compel and Distrain them to the Execution of their Duties in form aforesaid as appears in the Statute 25 E. 1. cap. 4. And all this he confirms by Solemn Oath What greater Security can be Invented here is an Act of Parliament Oath Excommunication Curses Edward the First for a furnish of Gold absolved by the Pope from his Oath Archbishops Bishops Prelates all ingaged to see it performed but to what purpose King Edward sends a Furnish of Gold to the Pope for his Chamber and he sends him back an Absolution from his Oath and Covenant with his Subjects concerning the Charter of their Liberties whereby they are all again broken by the King and lost to the Subjects Bak. Hist. 99. Edward the Second a papist King forswore himself to papist Subjects Edward the First being dead for the Pope's Absolution from his Oath could not keep him alive Edward the Second Succeeds him who not only took his Coronation Oath and kept it not but likewise before his Coronation in Regard the Lords threatned they would hinder it unless according to his Father's Will who had Commanded him to Banish Pierce Gaveston he would do the same he Solemnly swore That if they would not Dispute his Coronation but rest quiet till the next Parliament he would Banish him as they desired And likewise after in the Third year of his Reign being further press'd and importuned consented at last that the Parliament should draw Articles of Agreement between him and the People of whatsoever was necessary for the good of the Kingdom and he would Ratisie the same upon Oath who thereupon Elected divers Choice Men both of the Clergy Nobility and Commons to Compose those Articles which done the Archbishop of Canterbury with the rest of his Suffragans solemnly pronounce the Sentence of Excommunication against all such who should Contradict those Articles which are there Publickly read before the Barons and Commons of the Realm in the Presence of the King amongst which the Observation and Execution of Magna Charta is required with all other Ordinances necessary for the Church and Kingdom And that as the late King had done all Strangers should be Banished the Court and Kingdom and all Evil Counfellors removed That the Business of the State should be treated of by the Counsel of the Clergy and the Nobles That the King should not begin any War or go any way out of the Kingdom without the consent of the Common Council of the same Dan. Hist. 205. which Articles and others though they seemed harsh to the King yet to avoid further Trouble he yielded to them and Ratified them on Oath but especially to the Banishment of his Minion Pierce Gaveston who being a Gascoigne was a Stranger intended by the Articles to be Banished Strangers some to be Banished from Court though not under the same Suspition as other French their Countrey-men who have generally when entertained in Court by the English Kings been Evil Councellors to them to Imitate the French Arbitrary Power and Persidiousness over their Subjects and to breed Division between the King and People to prepare the Kingdom to be a Prey to their own French Masters Stranger at Court Spies whose Leidger Spies and Intelligencers they hear have usually been entertained at the Cost of the English Kings against themselves none can therefore doubt but King Edward the First the Father of this King Edward the Second did Nobly and Wisely in Banishing all Strangers from his Court and left the same Command on his Son And more particularly concerning this Gaveston though he not only broke in this the Command
the Earl of Warwick he leaves Edward and indeavours to restore again the Title of Henry the Sixth and removes him out of the Tower where he had been a Prisoner almost Nine years and Restores him his Crown and all Imperial Ornaments and Officers and King Edward is proclaimed an Usurper and all his partakers Traitors which forced King Edward to fly to the Duke of Burgoign his Brother-in-Law who had Married his Sister but Warwick sending Forces over to Callice to Infest the Dominions of Burgoign for Entertainment of Edward Burgoign being sensible of the storm likely to fall on him wisely so wrought that he made a Truce with King Henry The Duke of Burgoign a Papist Ally forswore himself to Henry the Sixth a Papist King and Ratisied it by Oath that he would give no Aid to his Brother-in-Law Edward against him Yet this Oath he immediately broke and under-hand furnished him with Eighteen tall Ships Two thousand Dutchmen and Fifteen thousand Florens of Gold Here may be seen what little Trust can be had by an English Papist Prince to the Oath of a Foreign Papist Prince though he pretend the common Obligation of the same Religion See here the next Example how little a Papist King can trust the Oath of a Papist Subject or a Papist Subject him After the Second Battel at St. Albans between the Queen and the Forces of Edward Earl of Marsh the Nobles who in outward shew before seemed for the King withdrew themselves from Attending his Person and the Lord Bonvile coming in a Complemental manner to the King saying It grieved him to leave his Majesty Henry the Sixth a Papist King broke his Promise to two Papist Subjects to the loss of their lives but Necessity for the Safeguard of his Life inforced it But at length he was importuned and Sir Thomas Kyviel likewise by the King to stay he passing his Royal Word that their stay should not indanger their Bodies upon which promise they stayed but to their cost for such was the implacable Fury of the Queen that hearing Baron Thorp was by the Commons Beheaded at Highgate she the day after the Battel being Ash-Wednesday caused both their Heads to be struck off at St. Albans Truss Hist 172. If so Saint-like a Papist King or his Queen for him broke his word to those of his own Religion what is to be expected from them who openly appear in the shape of the Father of Lies and care not for Transforming so much as in shew to Saint or Angel As the Duke of Burgoign had contrary to his Oath aided Edward with a Fleet Men and Money against Henry the Sixth so he himself coming over and Landing at Ravenspur in Yorkshire finding but cold Entertainment and having marched to York and finding as little Expression of Welcom he fell on the old Popish shift of swearing and forswearing Edward the Fourth a Papist King forswore himself though he took the Sacrament on it to Papist Subjects He therefore swore deeply and took the Sacrament upon it that he came not to disturb King Henry but only to recover his own Inheritance and for the more shew thereof he wore an Estritch Feather Prince Edward's Livery which Proposition seemed so reasonable that many who resisted him before were as ready to assist him now both Sides seeking to make London their Friend to which end the Earl of Warwick sends to his Brother the Archbishop of York to Labour in it with the City to continue their Fidelity to Henry their King which he did accordingly but could not get above Seven or Eight thousand Men a small proportion to withstand King Edward Comines and Bodin make the Reason why the Citizens were rather inclinable to bring Edward to be because he owed the City great Debts and if he should miss they should lose their Debts Others add another Reason to be Because Edward had been kind to many of the Citizens Wives who importuned their Husbands to receive him but whatever were the cause the Archbishop of York so much doubted of the effect of their being Faithful that he sent secretly to Edward to desire him to receive King Henry into his Grace which on promise of being Faithful thereafcer he obtained and thereupon the Archbishop delivered King Henry into King Edward's hands Edward the Fourth contrary to his Promise suffers Henry the Sixth to be Murdered So here Edward a Papist King promiseth Henry a Papist King on the greatest Consideration one King can give to another the Delivery of his Person into his Competitors hands that he will not hurt him in his Custody yet after he Commands or Suffers him to be Murdered in the Tower by his Brother the Duke of Gloucester where he was Imprisoned A Papist Successor will give no Liberty of Conscience to Papist Subjects 3. A Papist Successor will not give Papists themselves Liberty of Conscience insomuch as a Thought But will force the Conscience either by Imprisonment Inquisitions Racks or Tortures falsly to accuse it self or by Compulsion to Oaths or External Forms and Ceremonies of Worship to betray it self to the Injust punishment of Penal Laws and Statutes He will exercise the Cruelty of the Inquisition on Papists themselves How little the Papist Inquisition spare their own Papists though they have not the least exception against them for their Religion may in part appear by the following Story Father Ephraim a Friar Capuchin was Born at Anxerre in France and was Brother of Monsieur Chateaude Boys Councellor of the Parliament of Paris Father Ephraim was Learned in the Languages and of as great Diligence Learning Eloquence and blind Zeal in Preaching up the Papist Religion as the best of them And to spread the same he Travelled to the Indies and was there entertained at Bagnabar by the Chek who had Married the eldest of the Princesses of Golconda and he Promised to build him an House and a Church gave him an Ox and two Men to carry him to Maslipatan where he stayed to Imbark for Pegu according to the order of his Superiours but finding no Vessel ready to set Sail the English drew him to Madrespatan where they have a Fort called St. George and a General Factory for every thing that Concerns the Countries of Golconda Pegu and Bengala they over-perswaded him that he might reap a fairer Harvest in this place than in any other part of the Indies to which end they built him a very neat House and a Church Madrespatan is but half a League from St. Thomas a Sea-Town on the Coast of Cormandel where was a very great Trade especially for Calecots and a very great Number of Merchants and Workmen lived there the greatest part whereof desired to Inhabit at Madrespatan with the English but that there was no Place for them to Exercise their Religion But when the English had Built a Church and perswaded Father Ephraim to stay many of the Portugueses quitted St. Thomas by reason of