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
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
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
Eldest Son the only Heir intended 4. 'T is manifest this Statute intended no kind of Heir but the eldest Son and Heir First Because the Natural affection of the Father directs his intention irresistably to his eldest Son Secondly Because his Wisdom and Self-Preservation leads to the eldest Son who as is before shewn is above all other Children the chiefest Defence of the Father Thirdly Because the Black Prince who was intended to have the benefit of this Statute was the eldest Son and Heir of Edward the Third the maker of this Statute Haeres Sanguinis non Haereditatis intended 5. 'T is manifest this Statute intended Haeres Sanguinis and not Haeres haereditatis Heir of Blood and not Heir of Goods and Haeres viventis and not Haeres Defunâ—ti Except before he is Born and not after And though John-an-Oaks who hath been so long the Parret of Littleton and Coke's Law will stomach it very much to be taught a new Lesson yet under his favour his Tutors in these matters of Marriage Filiation and Succession were very much Mistaken or Partial in this as other Matters and many of them in the two former Books have been already shewn And I shall as to the two particulars here mention'd further shew first therefore That Haeres Sanguinis is intended in this Statute and not Hares Haereditatis 1. Because Haeres Sanguinis is Haeres designans Haeres Haereditatis Haeres designatus to be known by the other 2. Because the words of the Statute are our Lord the King the Lady his Companion or their Eldest Son and Heir Now the Heir of the Inheritance of a Kingdom cannot be intended Because he derives his Title to the same only from the King and not from the Lady Companion unless a Queen Regnant therefore he cannot be the Heir of both of them as he is Haeres Hereditatis but as he is Haeres Sanguinis he is Heir of the Blood of both of them which is the only Heir intended by this Statute Secondly seeing the Heir of Blood is in the Express words of the Statute And no words at all of the Heir of the Inheritance therefore the Heir of Inheritance ought not to be put in the intention otherwise than as Haeres designatus marked to be known by the first knowing who is Haeres Sanguinis because then a Penal Statute would be extended by Equity And as to the other Particular It is manifest That Haeres viventis is intended in this Statute and not Haeres defuncti except before he is born and not after First because the eldest Son who is Haeres Sanguinis most times happens to be born in the life-time of his Father and not to be a Rosthume and ad ea quae frequentius accidunt Jura adaptantur Therefore Posthumes which do rarely happen to be eldest Sons shall not be only intended to be within the Statute and the eldest Son on whom the Royal Blood descended en ventre sa mere And he was Heir to the same before he was born be therefore excluded because he is Haeres viventis to the same after he is born and his Father died not before his Birth Secondly The words of the Statute Restrain not the Heir to be Haeres defuncti before he is born or after he is born therefore to restrain by the intention of either is to extend a Penal Statute by Equity which ought not to be done Thirdly my Lord Coke himself 3 part fol. 9. in his Exposition on this Statute says That Heir is here taken for Heir apparent for he cannot be Heir in the life of the Father Haeres viventis intended Haeres Sanguinis and not Haeres Haereditatis It is a clear mistake for first an Heir apparent can only be of the King but the Statute makes him Heir both to King and Lady and the catch which they have got of Haeres non est viventis was never intended to be any other than Haeres Haereditatis which kind of Heir is before unanswerably Proved not to be intended within this Statute And if it had the Statute had served to little purpose to ascertain the Heir of the Crown so many sorts of Laws and Customs pretending to be the Rule of Judgment of Haeres Haereditatis but the eldest Son who is Haeres Sanguinis as is already shewn can be but one in the Three Kingdoms and that the King 's eldest Son who is Haeres Sanguinis the Chief Heir of his Blood by the Law of Nature and not him who is made Haeres Haereditatis by Papal and Episcopal Laws When Theseus had occasioned the Death of his Vertuous Valiant and eldest Son Hippolitus by the false Calumnies of Phaedra his Stepmother he crys out O nimium Potens Quanto Parentes Sanguinis vinclo tenes Natura quam te colimus inviti quoque Occidere volui noxium amissum fleo Seneca in Hippol. I cannot oh too potent Nature shun The Bonds of blood 'twixt Father and a Son His blood his blood I in my anger shed For whom I now shed Tears when he is dead And did not David fall into a greater Passion of Love for Absolon though the most Unnatural Ingrateful and Traiterous Son that ever was 2 Sam. 18.32 And the King said unto Cushi Is the young man Absolon safe and Cushi answered The enemies of my Lord the King and all that Rise against thee to do the hurt be as that young man is And the King was much moved and went up to the Chamber over the Gate and wept and as he wept thus he said Oh my Son Absolon would God I had died for thee oh Absolon my Son my Son But what would David have done if Absolon had been a Loyal and Obedient Son Oh! where he now only wished he had died once he would then have cryed out and wished he had died twice for him 7. All Heirs are either Lineal or Collateral unless therefore one of these Kinds are intended the Statute can intend none at all Collateral Heirs of the Crown not within this Statute now that Collateral Heirs are not intended is expresly delivered by Coke 3 Part. fol. 9. where he saith if the Heir apparent to the Crown be a Collateral Heir apparent he is not within this Statute as he saith Roger Mortimer Earl of March was Anno Dom. 1487. 11. R. Proclaimed Heir apparent Anno 39. H. 6. Richard Duke of York was likewise Proclaimed Heir apparent so was John de la Poole Earl of Lincoln by R. 3. and Henry Marquess of Exceter by King Henry the Eight but none of these or of the like are within this Statute if only Lineal Heirs are within the Statute there can be none but the eldest Son can be Heir intended the eldest being expresly named Heir and none besides named at all That to compass the Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's eldest Son is High Treason To Exile or Disinherit the King 's eldest Son High Treason
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
made Prince of Wales and when not Vbi Lex non distinguit ibi nec nos distinguere Debemus Besides the Kingdoms being now United a Title common to both were more convenient than several Titles The Roman Title Princeps Juventutis extended to the whole Empire Object 10 The Objection of Illegitimation answered I think the Objector hath now spit his Venom Of Illegitimation but let him take heed it doth not Poison himself for first I answer it is already proved That the Marriage of the Lady-Mother was Lawful Holy and Indissolvable according to both Precepts and Example of Scripture and that no Humane Power can Prohibit such Marriages which the Law of God hath not Prohibited Marriage a thing not indifferent not to be limited by the Laws of Men. and that Marriage is not a thing indifferent but necessary and Commanded by God and therefore what are made Actus Legitimi by God non recipiunt modum aut Conditionem from Men nor ought the Holy Ordinance of God be compelled to be prophaned by Papal Ceremonies and dare any then Illegitimate that Law of God by a Law Papal or an Act of Parliament by a Law Episcopal and vend such an Act as will hereafter be shewn to make it High Treason for any Subject to affirm the King 's eldest Son Illegitimate but before I proceed to that I shall first prove the following Thesis The eldest Son of a King of Great Britain Legitimate by his Birthright That not only by this Statute but by the Law of God the Law of Nations and the Jus Coronae of Great Britain Primogeniture in Succession hath been prefer'd and such Issue adjudged Legitimate Though procreated of unlawful Marriages and Persons Prohibited to Marry but was never question'd by any Law except that of Popes and Bishops in the Issue of Persons not Prohibited by the Law of God to Marry Concerning Legitimation by the Law of God and Nature there is more than enough already spoken Lib. 1. p. 79. to 83. and several other places already mentioned concerning the Laws declared in Scriptures this Right of Primogeniture and Legitimation was always observed amongst the Kings of Israel and Judah Primogeniture succeeded amongst the Patriarchs though no Marriage by a Priest in a Temple even in their most unlawful Marriages and without Ceremonies with strange Women of foreign Nations though expresly Prohibited to them by the Law of Moses as appears by Maimonides Godwyn's Jew Antiq. Selden and others but as to the same to be as brief as possible I shall only insist on one Example though not a Prince yet a Patriarch amongst them It is said Gen. 29.16 Laban had two Daughters the name of the Elder was Leah and the name of the younger was Rachel Leah was tender-eyed but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured And Jacob loved Rachel and said I will serve thee-seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter And Laban said It is better that I give her unto thee then that I should give her to another man abide with me And Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed unto him but a few days for the Love he had unto her And Jacob said unto Laban Give me my Wife for my days are fulfilled that I may Go in unto her And Laban gathered together all the men of the place and made a feast and it came to pass in the evening that he took Leah his daughter and brought her in unto him and he went in unto her Et Vers 25. And it came to pass in the Morning behold it was Leah And he said to Laban What is this thou hast done unto me Did not I serve with thee for Rachel wherefore then hast thou beguiled me Et Ver. 32. And Leah conceived and bare a Son and she called his name Reuben Gen. 49.3 Jacob saith Reuben thou art my first born my might and the beginning of my strength the excellency of Dignity and the excellency of Power From whence may be observed That if it were possible for any Objections to be of weight against the Right of Primogeniture and Legitimation in any it might have been made against this of Reuben For First Here is no Intent nor Consent no Contract no Espousal of Marriage by Jacob with Leah 2. There is no Banns no Leadings to Church no Ceremony no Joyning by the Priest no Benediction by him of Jacob and Leah 3. What is worse than the want of all these Here is 1 a meer Cheat a Woman that is hated in the dark clapt into the Bridegroom's Bed instead of her that is beloved 2 Here is the true Bride Robbed of her seven years expected Enjoyment by a false 3 Here is the Marriage-Covenant most perfidiously broken 4 The Labourer is defrauded of his hire for seven years Labour 5 Here is Adultery and Incest committed by the eldest Sister with the contracted Husband of the younger Sister 6 The elder Sister her self knows and is accessary to all these Crimes yet hath the Impudence to Rest all Night Acting them in a stoln Bed and to out-face them in the Light of the Rising Sun for behold in the Morning it was Leah notwithstanding all which Reuben is not punished for the Crimes of Leah nor doth he lose thereby the Right of his Primogeniture but Jacob declares him as aforesaid Gen. 49.3 Reuben thou art my first born my might and the beginning of my strength the excellency of Dignity and the excellency of Power And though he likewise express for the great Crime of Reuben himself the forfeiture of his Birth-right and that excellency which thereby belonged unto him and saith Vers 4. Thou shalt not excel because thou wentest up to thy Father's Bed then defiled'st thou it And the same is likewise declared 1 Chron. cap. 5.1 Now the sons of Reuben the first-born of Israel for he was the first-born But forasmuch as he defiled his fathers bed his Birth-right was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel Yet doth this prove the stronger that notwithstanding the unlawful Marriage and Crimes of Leah his Mother the Birth-right belonged unto him till he forfeited the Priviledge of it by so great a Crime as he himself Committed Legitimation impossible to be forfeited or to be taken from the Child or the Incidents to the same and notwithstanding he forfeited the Priviledge of his Birth-right yet he forfeited not his Legitimation but inherited an equal filial Portion with his younger Brethren for Legitimation is impossible to be forfeited taken away or destroyed unless it were possible to make the Son begot of such a Father not to have been begotten by him for if he was begot by him Filiation includes Legitimation and Aliment sufficient if the Child want it and the Father hath it in Possession and Succession ought to be given him though as to the Superalimentary Quantity of his Goods the Father hath Liberty to dispose them or alienate them from Legitimate and
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
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
injoyed near Threescore years after Had Antonio been allowed equal Judges or the Law of God been the Rule of their Judgment or had he been allowed to have pleaded the Law of the Land and Custom of both Portugal or Spain for Natural Sons to succeed the Crown he needed not have looked for more Examples of Natural Children than those from whom King Philip himself derived his many Spanish Kingdoms and according to the Customs of Portugal Don Antonio a Natural Son Crowned King of Portugal Don Antonio was on the Death of Henry chosen and Crowned King of Portugal at Lisbon their chief City till Philip sent the Duke of Alva thither with a greater Army than the Portuguese had put Don Antonio to flight Overcome by Philip flyes to England whom the People had Elected King and within Seventeen Days subdued all Portugal Don Antonio thereon flyes into England where he is kindly received of Queen Elizabeth as descended of English Blood and of the House of Lancaster and having entertained him here divers years his Title of being right Heir to the Crown of Portugal is so far approved by the Queen and Council Queen Elizabeth approves his Title as right Heir to Portugal and the Protestant Doctrine That she gave leave to Sir John Norris and Sir Francis Drake to undertake an Expedition at their own private Charges requiring nothing of her but a few Ships of War who took along with them Don Antonio the Heir of the Kingdom of Portugal and of Souldiers Eleven Thousand and of Seamen about Fifteen Hundred And setting Sail from Plimouth the Fifth day of April they arrived at the Groyne of Galizia whereof with great Valour they took first the Lower Town and afterwards the Higher and after Sailing towards Portugal they met Robert Earl of Essex who without the Queens leave had put to Sea after two days they arrive at Penycha a Town of Portugal which they took and left the Castle to Don Antonio And from thence they march by Land towards Lisbon Threescore Miles off the Foot Companies led by Norris whom Drake promised to follow with the Fleet being come to the West Suburbs of Lisbon they found no body there but a few poor disarmed Portugals who cryed out God save King Antonio The day following the Spaniards made a Sally in which Skirmish Bret Caresly and Carre three stout Commanders were Slain yet did the Earl of Essex drive the Spaniards to the very Gates of the City And now having tarried here two Days and no likelihood of the Portugals revolting which Don Antonio had hoped but was not probable that the strict hand of the King of Spain then in full Possession on them should give them that Liberty sinding fresh Supplies to come into the Town their own Army Sickly Victuals and Powder failing and what was most of all Sir Francis Drake not bringing the great Ordnance as he promised They departed from the Suburbs of Lisbon towards Caseais a little Town at the Mouth of the River Tagus which Town Drake had taken this mean while who excused his not coming to Lisbon by reason of the Flats he must have passed and the Castle of St. Julian Fortified with Fifty Pieces of great Ordnance Near this Place they found Threescore Hulks of the Hans-Towns of Germany Laden with Corn and all manner of Munition which they took as good Prize towards their Charges in regard the Queen had forbidden them to carry Victual and Munition to the Spaniard From hence they sailed to Virgo a Forlorn Town by the Sea side and Pillaging all along that Quarter returned for England having lost in the Voyage Soldiers and Marriners about Six thousand yet not so much by the Enemy as eating strange Fruit and Distemper of the Climate on which I shall only further observe That Kingdoms are not so easily got again as they are lost and that the Disinheriting of the Natural Heir of the Crown of Portugal was the cause of the seizure and Conquest by the Spaniard of that Kingdom Foreign Princes when the Successor is uncertain will stir up so many antiquated Genealogies Antiquated Genealogies used to be raked up by Foreign Princes that every one may pretend a right to the Crown and it hath been already mentioned that there were no less than Five or Six to the Crown of Portugal no less than Ten Titles Foreign and Domestick in Scotland in the time of Basiel and Bruce and no less than Sixteen in England before the Death of Queen Elizabeth and how far Papist Foreign Princes will go when they have none nearer to draw Genealogies as high as the Man in the Moon and when they have no substance to raise the Ghosts of Titles again from their old Purgatories nor Kif nor Kin to the last Possessors appears by the next Example Hacket endeavours to raise a Papist Title to the Crown Richard Hacket was sent from the English Fugitives beyond Sea in the Reign of Queen Eliz. to perswade Ferdinando Stanly E. of Derby Son to Henry newly Deceased to assume the Title of the Kingdom of England by right of Descent from Mary Daughter to Henry the Seventh and threatning him unless he undertook the Enterprize and withal concealed him the Abettor he should shortly die in a most wretched manner But the Earl fearing a Trap was laid for him revealed it and Hacket was thereon Condemned and Executed for Treason but this Fellow's Threatnings proved not vain four Months after for then the Earl being in the Flower of his Age was miserably Tormented and Vomited Stuff of a dark rusty Colour being thought to be Poisoned or Bewitched There was found in his Chamber a little Image of Wax with Hairs of the Colour of his Hair which some thought was done on purpose that men should not suspect him to be Poisoned his Vomit so stained the Silver Andirons that it could never be gotten out and his Body though put in Cere-Cloths and wrapped in Lead did so stink and putrifie that for long time none could endure to come near where he was Buried Bak. Hist 402. When good Correspondence between Queen Elizabeth and King James of Scotland gave the Papists small hopes that ever he would prove an Instrument to restore the Catholick Religion they begun thereupon to bethink themselves of some English Papist that might succeed the Queen but finding none of their own Sect a fit Person they fixed their thoughts on the Earl of Essex who always seemed a very moderate Man and him they advised to have some right to the Crown by Descent from Thomas of Woodstock King Edward the Third's Son But the English Fugitives were for the Infanta of Spain English Fugitives seek to seâ— up a Title for the Infanta of Spain and to exclude all Protestants from the Crown and desiring to set the King of Scots and the Earl of Essex at odds they set forth a Book which they Dedicated to Essex under the Name of Doleman but
Wife of God's making shall by him be call'd though he false Translate Scripture for it Concubine and Whore And a Whore and Adulteress of the Bishops making shall be call'd a Wife of God's making of which Episcopal Abuses to get Money I shall only cite one Practique in Scotland and after some others in England Craig Feudorum Fo. 230. saith Memini Robertum Magistrum de Semphil Patrem Roberti nunc Principem illius familiae cùm ex concubinatu Joannae Hamiltoniae hunc ipsum filium suscepisset ei impensè faveret in Articulo Mortis cù sibi decedendum videret ad Aedem sacram se in Lecticâ deferri curaret ibique nuptiis solemniter peractis cùm domum rediisset Octavo pòst die fatis concessisse Ex quo subsequente Matrimonio licet in Lecto agritudinis in quo Decessit solemniter peracto filius antea susceptus non minùs in Haereditate successit quà m si ex legitimo Matrimonio natus fuisset I remember that Robert the Master of Semphil Father of Robert now chief of that Family when he had begotten him by his Concubine Madam Joane Hamilton and intirely loved him He being at point of Death when he saw himself past hopes caused himself to be carried to the Holy Church in a Litter and there the Ceremonies of Marriage being solemnly perform'd when he was brought back again to his House he died eight dayes after from which subsequent Marriage although in the bed of Sickness wherein he deceased the Son begot before did as Lawfully succeed to the Inheritance as if he had been begot in Lawful Matrimony And why should not the Lady have been call'd Wife but Concubine and the Son have succeeded without so barbarous a Ceremony as hurrying a Dying Man to a Priest and a Temple when he was gasping for another world to get a Wife in this an Act more proper to hasten his Death and Burial than Marriage and to have been abhorred by all Dutiful Children had they not been compell'd by the Tyranny of such Popish Ecclesiastical Laws as to the Dishonour of the two so Renown'd Protestant Kingdoms in Great Britain are Tolerated to prey worse than Death on them and their Posterity But of the false Translations of Scripture by Bishops in all other words related to Marriage see more at large Lib. 2. cap. 1. 142 ad 162. Of certain differences between a Wife of the Bishop's making and Wife of God's making which make the first neither within the Law of God nor the Statute There 's no Protestant Nation in Christendom wherein the Jurisdiction usurped by Bishops is so high and Extravagant in making other Mens Wives and Children for them as in England 1. The first difference between a Wife of the Bishop's making and of God's making is The former lets herself to Hire to him who will give most Jointure Dower or Thirds for her but the latter doth neither buy nor sell her Husband but he keeps his own and she hers both Money Goods and Lands Concerning mercenary Marriages Vid. Lib. 1. cap. 6.113 Vsque ad 118. 2. A Wife of the Bishops making hath Power to Steal and Esloigne all her Husband's Substance and to put it into the hands of his Enemies for her own use and he can have no account against her because as is already shewn Lib. 1. p. 70. The Bishop by his Sacrament of Marriage hath Transubstantiated two persons into one person but the Wife of Gods making is under account and nothing keeps a Steward Faithful but Account 3. The Wife of the Bishops making hath Power given her by the Benediction of a Priest in a Temple if she is not able her self to hire unknown persons with her Husbands Goods to Rob Beat and Disseise her Husband and Esloigne his Goods and no remedy against her But a Wife of Gods making though she hath Gods Benediction which is above the Priests hath no such power but there 's remedy against her 4. The Wife of the Bishops making hath Power to lay all her secret and unknown debts true and feigned by her Confederates and as many as she will on her husband and to undo him and no remedy against her 5. The Wife of the Bishops making hath Power by the Benediction of a Priest in a Temple to commit as many Trespasses either with Tongue or hand truly or by Confederacy with complices as often as she pleases making her husband pay Damages till undone and he hath no remedy 6. A Wife of the Bishops making hath full Power by virtue of the said Benediction to hire Adulterers with her Husbands Goods and Money to get Children to succeed to them and he has no remedy Adulteresses protected and the Son of an Adulterer made Heir before the Lawful Child of the Husband by Episcopal Certificat 7. A Wife of the Bishops making if she hath a Daughter by her Husband and Elope and run away from him with another man and hath Issue by her New Companion the Adulterer her Eldest Son this Son of the Adulterer shall be Heir to the Husbands Inheritance though he were the greatest Peer in the Land Yea though he had an Elder Daughter before of his own begetting by her As appears 7 H. 4. fo 9. Where the Case was That Julian took to Husband John de C. in the County of York and was Married at Fleetsham and the said John had Issue by her W After the said Julian Eloped and went into the County of N. and it being not Felony in those daies took to Husband W. B. and he had Issue by her W. her Eldest Son who after sued to be Heir to John and the true Heir of John objected against him the Elopement of his Mother â—â—dian and his being begotten by the Adulterer and not by John On which Justice Rikhill gives Judgment That if John were within the Four Seas at the time of the begetting of W. then W. was the Son and right Heir-Male of John The Calf his whose Cow is Bull'd by anothers Bull. And of this he giveth a good Lusty Reason For saith he who that Bulleth my Cow the Calf is mine And my Lord Coke Com. 244 doth on the Margin refer to this Authority of Justice Rikhill and agrees with him as right as a Gun and adds over That no Proof ought to be admitted to the contrary and therein I think none will Envy Justice Rikhill or my Lord Coke who I think were within the Four Seas and never out to enjoy the Liberty of Conscience in disposing their own Goods how they please But there appears no Reason why they should deny the same Liberty of Conscience to all the rest of their fellow Subjects who live within the same Four Seas to dispose of their own Goods as they think Just neither ought they by so unequal a Sentence to have given away the Successions of True and Lawful Heirs without allowing them hearing or witnesses to those who are false and adulterous And
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
saith to the Poor the Gospel is preached but the Poor can take no benefit of Coemptions or buying of Women for Money or for Jointures or Thirds nor are able to give Fees to Lawyers for Indentures or to Priests for Ceremonies or to buy Licenses or Gold Rings or to pay so much as for Banns or Proclamations Christ therefore never intended they should be Prohibited all Marriage except it were Coemptione Instrumentis or Confarriatione he gave them therefore that Marriage which was Copulatione otherwise they could have the benefit of no Marriage at all Seventhly 'T is manifest that Christ makes the Marriage Copulatione to be the Ordinance of God which was from the beginning for which a man should leave father and Mother and should cleave to his Wife and this was the Law of Moses and the Law of the Romans and Christ doth establish and confirm it by forbidding any Divorce except for Fornication which in the Woman is Polyandry and according to the Maxim of Nature Vnumquodque dissolvitur eodem modo quo Conflatum est As Carnal knowledge by a Woman with her Husband shall make Marriage so Carnal knowledge with another Man doth unmake and dissolve the Marriage If therefore Marriage by Carnal knowledge only is according to the Doctrine of Christ a joyning together by God and indissoluble à Fortiore Procreation of a Child between them is a joyning together by God and Indissoluble by Man and even it is by the Light of Nature acknowledged That Procreation of Children is a greater obligation than Copulation not fruitful Nascitur ad fructum Mulier prolemque futuram Claud. in Eutrop. Tormentum ingens Nubentibus haeret Quòd nequeant parere partu retinere Maritos Juv. Sat. 2. Faemina cùm senuit retinet Connubia partu VxorÃsque Decus Matris Reverentia pensat Nos Lucina fugit nec pignorâ— nitimur ullâ— Claud. in Eutrop. An Epithalamium on the Marriage of Nature intended by Christ without a Priest or Temple BRazen was Venus when in Pride To Temples throng'd she led a Bride Who with a blush Like Rosie bush First with one man in Woods did hide There free from fascinating charms And Hungry Wolves more cruel harms The Lamb did play And never stray From fold of her own Shepherds arms Fair Chastity in Angels shape The Nymphs there taught how to escape With pretty smiles And witty wiles From every wanton Satyr's rape The Turtle there in secret sate As sick of Love as was her Mate And still did moan To him alone Nor from him fled until her Fate The lesser Birds did sit and sing How these in prime the Queen and King Had been of May So sweet and Gay When it approached to the Spring There in the Royal Oak of Jove Princes did wed and Live and Love And of Renown Without a Crown They Kingdoms had from God above Fast by in Cottages of Reed The Subjects lay who were agreed Their Love did bless With Happiness Oh happy thrice they and their seed No Mother there more fierce and wild Then Tyger kill'd her new born Child Nor from it fly For Parish cry The Father did or was exil'd The weeping Babe not babling Fame Dar'd illegitimate their Name Or Punishment On Innocent To lay of Parents guilt or shame Thus had the lovely Pairs at first Had not the State of Man been curst In Eden's Bowers New drest with Flowers Their own Fruit unforbidden nurst Thus he did Marriage make divine Who Water turned into Wine And Heav'n to fill Where is no ill With little Children did design Till what was right was feign'd amiss Vnless the Priest had the Tenth kiss And fees beside To bless the Bride Then lost they Innocence and bliss Obj. 7. The eldest Son not Heir intended by the Statute Eldest Son not Heir Answ 1. This Objection is in its own Nature repugnant to it self That the eldest Son and Heir in the Letter of the Statute is not the Heir in the Intention 2. T is Protestatio contraria facto and not only to the Fact of another but to the Parties own-Fact who Objects for the Popish Party who deny him to be Heir in their words affirm him to be Heir by their Deeds and wicked Plots to kill him as Heir that they may seize on his Inheritance as is already shewn Matth. 21.38 They said amongst themselves This is the Heir come let us seize on his Inheritance A multitude of kinds of Heirs 3. The word Heir is the Genus and eldest Son is the Difference So the Heir intended by this Statute is not only described but perfectly defined and differenced from all other Species of Heirs As there is Haeres Sanguinis and Haeres Haereditatis there is Haeres factus and Haeres Natus Haeres de facto and Haeres de Jure Haeres verus and Haeres fictitius Haeres Astrarius and Haeres Apparens There is farther the Heir by the Civil Law who succeeds in Vniversum Jus Antecessoris immoveable and moveable Possessions and Obligations There is the Hier by the Law of Scotland and Customs in the North who succeeds to Lands Heirlooms and Heretable Bonds but not to other Moveables There is the Heir by Custom and the Heir by Law There is Haeres ex provisione Legis and Haeres ex provisione hominis There is the Heir by Contract inter viros and Heir Testamentary and Heir Dative There is Haeres Viventis and Haeres Defuncti There is the Heir in Gavelkind and Heir in Burgh English There is the Heir by the Ecclesiastical Law and Heir by the Common Law and Heir by the Statute Law There is the true Heir and Heir by the Certificate of the Bishop There is the Heir per Jus Coronae and the Heir by the Law for Subjects There is the Heir by the Ceremonial Laws of Men and the Heir by the Moral Law of God There is the Heir of the Husband and the Heir of the Wife Heir of the first and Heir of the second Marriage and so many other Kinds there are of Heirs here not named as the old Rhyme though made on another Subject may be true enough applied to this Of Heirs there are as many Kinds As Marriners have found out Winds And should all these Kinds of Heirs the greatest part of whom were before this Statute left unlimitted as to Supreme Successions either at once or Successively in the Three Kingdoms bring their pretensions of Right to Tryal by Battels though Papists would Rejoyce in such perpetual Tempests as they themselves had raised to Rent the Brittish Oak in pieces yet no Protestant there would be who would not acknowledge it a great Providence of God and Piety and Prudence in this Statute which to prevent the Causes of so many Intestine Discords hath restrained the manifold kinds of Heirs to whom there can be but one at a time in the Three Kindoms who is the King 's eldest Son and Heir of his Blood