the Spaniards return'd and depriv'd Peter the second time and slew him in fight hand to hand who proved an excellent Prince and for his great nobility in Conversation and prowess in Chivalry was called El Cavalero the Knightly King and for his exceeding benignity and liberality was Sirnam'd also El delas Mercedes i.e. the King who gave many Gifts or the liberal frank and bountiful King which was a great alteration from King Peter the Cruel his Predecessor In Portugal also before I go out of Spain I will alledge one Example more which is of Don Sancho the 2d fourth King of Portugal lawful Son to Don Alenso Sirnam'd El Gardo 3d King of Portugal This Don Sancho after he had Reigned 34 years was deprived for his defects in Government by the universal Consent of all Portugal Garib lib. 4. de hist Port. cap. 19. and this approved by a general Council in Lions and Don Alonso third Brother to the said Don Sancho succeeded who enjoy'd the Kingdom of Portugal prosperously and peaceably all the days of his life and he was a notable King who among other great Exploits set Portugal free from all subjection Garib hist Port. lib. 34. cap. 20. dependance and homage to the Kingdom of Castile which unto his time it had acknowledged and he left for his Successor his Son and Heir Don Dionysio el Fabricador that is the Great Builder for he built and founded above 44 great Towns in Portgual and was a very excellent Prince In Polonia Henry the 3d who was King of France thô before Sworn King of Poland Vide Gagnen part 1. of which Crown he was deprived by publick Act of Parliament for departing thence without Licence and not returning at his day by the State appointed and denounced by publick Letters of peremptory Commandment This was a clear Abdication and the said State proceeded against him much after the same manner as ours did against the late King James In Denmark Cisternus their lawful King if we respect his descent in Blood being Son to King John who Reigned before him and Crown'd in his Fathers life was deposed for his intolerable Cruelty and driven into Banishment together with his Wife and three Children which were all disinherited and his Uncle Frederick Prince of Holsatia was chosen King and Cisternus thô he married the Sister of Charles the 5th Emperour of Germany and was Related also to Henry the 8th of England yet he could never prevail to be restored but past his time miserably partly in Banishment and partly in Prison till he died Now I think it convenient to end this short Narration with an Example or two out of England being I have not read of more remarkable Accidents concerning this Point than in the History of this Kingdom But for brevities sake I shall content my self with three or four Examples which hapned since the Conquest thô I may well look higher as appears by the deprivation of King Edwin and others Now I might instance King John who the States had deprived first at Canterbury and after at London in the 18th year of his Reign but being he was in actual War with the Barons and had a considerable Party to espouse his Quarrel and not being deprived by Parliament I shall therefore pass it by not accounting it so compleat a Deposition as that of Edward the Seconds was Polydor. lib. 18. it being done by Act of Parliament assembled in London in the year 1326 and his Body adjudg'd to perpetual Imprisonment he being Prisoner at that time in the Castle of Wallingford Stow in the Life of Edw. the 2d whether divers both Bishops Lords and Commoners were sent to him to denounce the Sentence of the Realm against him viz. how they had deprived him and chosen Edward his Son in his stead For which act of chasing his Son he thank'd them heartily and with many Tears acknowledg'd his own unworthiness Whereupon he was degraded his name of King first taken from him and he appointed to be call'd Edward of Carnarvan and then his Crown and Ring were taken away and the Steward of his House brake the Staff of his Office in his presence and discharged his Servants of their Services and all other People were discharged of their Obedience and Allegiance to him and towards his Maintenance he had only 100 Marks a year allowed for his Expences and then he was delivered into the hands of particular Keepers who led him Prisoner from thence to many other places using him with extreme Indignity in the way until at last they took away his Life in Berkley Castle and his Son Edward the 2d Reign'd in his stead who if we respect either Valour Prowess length of Reign acts of Chivalry or the multitude of Famous Princes his Children left behind him was one of the noblest Kings that ever England had After him succeeded Richard the 2d Son and Heir to the renowned Black Prince of Wales who forgetting the miserable end of his Great Grandfather for evil Government and the felicity of his Grandfather for the contrary suffered himself to be abus'd and misled by evil Counsellors to the great prejudice and disquiet of the Realm For which cause after he had Reigned 22 years he was also depos'd by Act of Parliament held at London 1399 and condemn'd to perpetual Imprisonment in the Castle of Pomfret where he was soon after put do death as the other before had been in whose place by free Election was chosen the Noble Henry Duke of Lancaster who prov'd a notable King and was Father to Henry the 5th commonly call'd the Alexander of England for as Alexander the Great conquered most part of Asia in the space of 9 or 10 years so did this Henry conquer France in less time I may also reckon in the number of Princes depriv'd for defect in Government thô otherwise of no ill life Henry the 6th who after 40 years Reign was deposed and imprisoned by Edward the 4th of the House of York and the same was confirm'd by the Commons and especially by the People of London and also by publick Act of Parliament not only in respect of the Title which King Edward pretended but also by reason that King Henry suffered himself to be over rul'd by the Queen his Wife and had broken the Articles of Agreement made by the Parliament between him and the Duke of York and solemnly sworn on both sides in punishment whereof and of his other negligent and evil Government Sentence was given against him and Edward the 4th elected in his place who was an excellent Prince But after this there sell another Accident much more notorious which was That Richard Duke of Gloucester this King Edward's Brother did put to death his two Nephews and made himself King and thô he acted very barbarously by taking the Crown in this wicked manner yet when his Nephews were once dead he might reasonably seem to be lawful King both
admit the Succession of Etheldred both in respect of the Murther of King Edward his elder Brother committed for his sake as also for that he seem'd a Man very unsit for Government and of this Opinion was that holy Man Dunstand Archbishop of Canterbury who in flat words denied to Consecrate him but seeing the most part of the Realm incline to his side he told that it would repent them afterwards and that in his Life the Nation should be destroy'd as indeed it was and he forc'd to Normandy and left Sweno and his Danes in the possession of the Realm thô after Sweno's Death he return'd and died in London He had two Wives the first an English Woman by whom he had prince Edmond Sirnam'd Ironside for his great strength and courage Now he that will consider the passage of the Crown of England from the death of Edmond Ironside eldest Son of King Etheldred until the acquisition thereof by William Duke of Normandy will easily se what Authority the Commonwealth hath had to alter Titles of Succession according as publick necessity required Now since King William the First commonly call'd the Conquerour thô in truth he never grounded his Title upon any thing but the Election of the Confessor and Consent of the people the exclusion of Princes against the ordinary course of Succession is more notorious than in elder times therefore I shall only refer the Reader to their particular Lives who succeeded before the lawful Heirs by propinquity of Blood. As first William Rufus and henry the First before Robert their elder Brother King Stephen before Henry the Second and King John before Arthur Duke of Britain Some years afte when the Barons and States of England dislik'd the Governent of King John they rejected him and chose Lewis the Prince of France to be their King and swore Fealty to him at London and depriv'd the young Prince Henry his Son but after the death of his Father king John they recall'd again that Sentence and admitted this Henry to the Crown by the name of Henry the third and disannull'd the oath and Allegiance made to Lewis of France Now from this Henry the Third the Houses of Britany Lancaster and York do seem to issue as a triple Branch our of one Tree Now if we consider the Titles of the Kings of the House of York and those of Lancaster we shall see plainly that the best of all their Titles after the deposition of King Richard the Second depended most or the Authority of the Commonwealth for as the People were affected and the greater part prevailed so were their Titles either confirm'd altered or disannulled by Parliament and yet we may safely affirm that either part when they were in possession of the Crown and confirm'd therein by parliament were true and lawful Kings and that God concur'd with them as with true Princes for government of their People For if we should deny this Point great Inconveniences would follow and we should shake the States of most princes in the World at this day as by Examples which I have already alledg'd may appear And sO I shall end this point affirming That as propinquity of Blood is a great preheminence towards the attaining of any Crown yet it doth not bind the Commonwealth to admit it if weightier Reasons should urge the contrary Now it will be a further proof of what I have before alledg'd viz. That all Commonwealths have prefix laws to their Princes which they are as much bound to keep as any Subject if we consider their oaths at their Admission or Coronation And first of the Emperour who Swears to defend the Christian Religion to minister Justice equally to all Men to keep and observe all laws and priviledges of the Empire not to alienate or engage the possessions of the Empire to condemn no man but by course of Law and that whatsoever he does otherwise shall be void and of no validity Unto these Articles he Swears first by his Legates and he gives a Copy of his oath to each Elector and after he goes to be Crown'd where in the middle of Mast the Archbishop of Colen asks in the presence of all the the People Whether he is ready to Swear to the aforesaid Articles and he answers that he is then the Archbishop leads him to the high Altar where he Swears to them in express words which being done the Archbishop turning to the princes of the Empire and People there present asks them Whether they be content to swear Obedience and Fealty to him who answers Yes then he 's Anointed and the other two Archbishop lead him into the Vestry where Deacons are ready to put on his Robes then the Bishop of Colen delivereth him a drawn Sword and puts a Ring on his Finger and a Scepter in his Hand and then the three Archbishops put the Crown on his head and so he 's plac'd on the Imperial Throne where all the Princes swear Obedience to him Now it 's to be noted that the Emperour Swears three times twice himself and once by his Deputies before his Subjects Swear once to him In Polonia the manner of Crowning thieir King is in substance the same as of the Emperour His Oath is in these Words I do promise and swear before God and his Angels that I will do Law and Justice to all and keep the Peace of Christ's Church and the Vnion of his Catholick Faith and if which God forbid I should break my Oath I am content that the Inhabitants of this Kingdom owe no Duty or Obedience unto me as God shall help me and gods Holy Gospel In Spain I find that the manner of admitting their Kings was different and not the same before and after the destruction thereof by the Moors but yet in both times their Kings did Swear in effect the self-same Points which before have been mentioned in other Kingdoms Now Ambrosio Moral reports Ambro. Moral lib. 13. cap. 2. That a certain law was found writen in the Gothish Tongue and left since the time of Don Pelayo the first King after the Moors which prescrib'd how Men must make their King in Spain and how he must swear to the priviledges and Liberties of that nation Before all things it 's establisht for a law Liberty and Priviledge of Spain that the Kings shall be made by Voices and Consent perpetually to the intent that no Evil king may enter without the Consent of the people seeing they are to give him that which with their Blood and Labours they have gain'd from the Moors Thus far goes the first Article of this Law which is the more to be noted because the most ancient of the Spanish Historians do say that from this Don Pelayo the Succession of their Kings was ever by propinquity of Blood and yet we see that Election was joyned with it in express terms The second part of that Law contain'd the Ceremonies us'd in those old times at the admission of their
in respect that he was next Mále after his Brother as also because his Title was authoriz'd and made good by many Acts of Parliament both before and after the deaths of those Infants and yet I think no man will say but that Henry of Richmond had very good reason to come out of France being Called and Invited by the People of England to revenge the Cruelties and Arbitrary things done by Richard the 3d and that this undertaking was no less successful than generous and obtain'd the Crown for his pains after that Richard had died in the Field and became King by the name of Henry the 7th and no man I suppose will deny him to have been a true and lawful King. And moreover as I said before I would have you consider in all these mutations what Kings always succeeded in the places of such as have been depos'd as namely in England in the place of those Five Kings before-mentioned viz. John Edward the 2d Richard the 2d Henry the 6th and Richard the 3d there have succeeded three Henries the 3d 4th and 7th and 2 Edwards the 3d and 4th some of them most rare and valiant Princes who have done many important Acts in their Commonwealth and among others have raised many Houses to the Nobility put down others changed States both abroad and at home distributed Ecclesiastical Dignities altered the course of Descent in the Royal Blood and the like all which was unjust and is void at this day if the Changes and Deprivations of the former Princes were not lawful and consequently King James the 6th of Scotland nor any of his Descendents had Title to this Crown because they descend from those Kings who were elected in place of the deprived And this I take to be a sufficient proof That lawful Kings have many times been lawfully deposed by the States of the Kingdom for Misgovernment Now I suppose it will be readily granted That this ample Authority has been actually exercised by the aforesaid Commonwealths against their evil Princes but yet many perhaps will ask Quo jure by what Law or Right I answer By all Laws both Divine and Human Divine by that Form of Government which every Kingdom doth chuse unto it self as also the Conditions Statutes and Limitations which it shall appoint to their Princes as largely before hath been declared And by Human Law also being all Law both Natural National and Positive declares That Princes are obliged to govern by Law and Order For if they should be bound to no Rules of Justice but must be obeyed be their Commands never so illegal and wicked then is the end of all Royal Government and Authority utterly defeated and useless then may we submit to all the Injustice and Arbitrary Commands that can be given to publick Murderers Ravishers Thieves and Spoilers to devour us for such indeed are they who follow no Law but Passion and Sensuality committing Injustice by their publick Authority And finally which is the chiefest Reason of all and the very ground and foundation of all Kingly Authority among Christians the Power and Authority which the Prince hath from the Commonwealth is not absolute but a Power delegate or Power of Trust delegated by Commission from the People which is given with such Restrictions Limitations and Conditions even with such plain Promises and Oaths of both parties I mean between the King and Peoâ—le at the day of Admission or Coronation as if the same be not kept but wilfully broken on either part then is the other not bound to observe his Promise tho' never so solemnly made or sworn for that in all Bargains Agreements and Contracts where each part is mutually and reciprocally bound to the other by Oath Vow or Condition there if one party break his Promise the other is not obliged to perform And this is so evident by all Law both of Nature and Nations and so conformable to all Reason and Equity that it 's inserted among the very Rules of both the Civil and Law of Nations where it 's said Frustra fidem sibi quis postulat servari ab co cui fidem à se praestitam servare recusat He doth in vain require a Promise to be kept to him by another to whom he refuseth to perform that which himself promised And again Non astringitur quis Jaramento adimplendum quod juravit si ab alia parte non impletur cujus respectu praebuit Juramentum A man is not bound to perform that which by Oath he promised if on the other part that be not performed in respect whereof his Oath was made As for Example if two should swear to assist each other upon the way in all respects and after falling upon Enemies who were Relations of Friends to one of them and he should take their part against his Companion its clear that the other was not bound to keep his Oath to that Man that had so wickedly broken his to him Nay not only in this case that is so evident by Nature it self but in many others also it is both lawful honest and convenient to leave sometimes the performance of our Oath when by fulfilling it there would accrue any notable Inconveniences against Religion Piety Justice Honesty or the weal-publick or against the party himself to whom it was made As if one had sworn to restore a Sword to a mad or furious Man wherewith it were likely he would destroy himself or others and such like cases which Cicero sets down in his first Book of Offices and deduces them from the very ground of Nature and Reason it self and says that it were against the duty of a good or honest Man it such cases to perform his Promise Our Divines also do alledge the Example of Herod who had sworn to the Daughter of Herodias to give her what she demanded who demanded the Head of S. John Baptist thô Herod was sorry for it yet saith the Text For his Oaths sake he commanded it to be performed which yet no man will deny but that it had been far better left unperformed according to the Rule of Law In malis promissis fidem non expedit-observare It is not expedient to keep our Oath when unlawfully made And in the second Part of the Decretal there 's alledged this Sentence out of Isidorus and establish'd for Law In malis promissis rescinde fidem in turpi voto muta decretum impia enim promissio quae scelere impletur In evil Promises perform not your word in an unlawful Vow or Oath change your determination for its an impious Promise that cannot be fulfill'd but with Wickedness So as nothing is more largely handled both in the Civil and Canon Law than this matter of Promises how and when and in what case they hold or bind and when not All which to apply to our matter of Kings We are to understand that two evident Cases are touched here when a Subjects Oath or Promise of Obedience may be left