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
him Children both the beloved and the hated Yea it may often fall out That the Children of the first Woman may be first born and elder than the Children of the second Woman yet if the first and the Lawful man hath an eldest Daughter and the second and unlawful Woman hath an eldest Son The Son of the second unlawful and hated Woman shall succeed before the Daughter of the first Lawful and beloved Woman à Fortiore shall the eldest Son if born of the first Woman succeed Primogeniture to be in Marriage though without Ceremonies 3. Though there is no Ceremonial but only the Moral Marriage yet shall the eldest Son of the Moral Marriage inherit For it is not mentioned nor is it that the Woman who brought forth the First born should be first carried before a Priest in a Temple before the Woman who had a younger Son for that would be repugnant to the Law of Succession by Primogeniture and impossible to consist with it and the Israelites never used any such Ceremony or other But used the first Solemnity of Marriage when they used any except Sub Dio where they might see the Heavens in Memory of the Promise made to Abraham Gen. 15.5 That his Seed should be in Number as the Stars 4. 'T is to be observed That not an eldest Son by Fiction of an Husband who was within the Four Seas but the truly first begotten Son shall succeed for the words are he may not make the Son of the beloved first born but the Son of the hated which is indeed the first born so not the eldest Son by Fiction but the eldest Son indeed is here only both expressed and intended 5. That the Right of Primogeniture extends not only to Aliment for that all Children elder and younger Sons and Daughters have an equal right to But the right of Primogeniture extends in private Families amongst the Israelites to a double Portion and in Succession to Kingdoms to the whole For the words in Deut. are A double Portion of all that he hath and the words of Chro. are The Kingdom he gave to Jehoram because he was his first born 6. That the reason why a greater Portion is given to the eldest of what is Superalimentary than to the younger Children is That he is the Chief strength of the Family to defend the Father when Aged and the Children when left in Minority and the Inheritance it self when Invaded by Pretenders The words therefore are for he is the beginning of his strength the Right of the first born is his 7. That the Bishop ought not be witness of the Filiation or Primogeniture of the Son Feminine Popes if any and not Male ought to make Certificates of Primogeniture But the Matter being in the Israelites Countrey the same ought to be testified by two or three witnesses as Deut. 19.15 and more modestly by Faeminine witnesses than Per Papas mares as likewise appears by the Example Gen. 38.27 And it came to pass in the time of her Travail that behold Twins were in her womb And it came to pass when she Travailed that the one put out his hand and the Midwife took and bound upon his hand a Skarlet Thread saying This came out first and it came to pass as he drew back his hand that behold his Brother came out and she said How hast thou broken forth This breach be upon thee therefore his name was called Pharez And afterward came out his Brother that had the Skarlet Thread upon his hand and his name was called Zarah 8. That the Bishop ought not to be Judge of the Filiation or Primogeniture but the Father himself for the words are He shall acknowledge the Son of the hated for the first born which is the Natural Father shall acknowledge or Cognosce him to be his first born 9. That in Countries under Arbitrary Power and the Regal Power not limited by Laws both the Royal Issue and Nobles lye commonly under great Danger of being cut off by new Successors unless they are of the true Religion and fear God 10. That such Successors are often set on to great Cruelties by Idolatrous Wives as appears in this Example of Jehoram who as is mentioned in the Text slew all his Brethren with the Sword and divers also of the Princes of Israel And he walked in the way of the Kings of Israel as did the house of Ahab for the Daughter of Ahab was his Wife and he did evil in the Sight of God 11. That in such Countries where Religion and Laws bear not sway the more Rich and Potent the younger Sons of Princes are made the more danger they incur of losing all 1 Because the Treasury of the Crown is thereby Exhausted and Impoverished as here Jehosophat gave his younger Sons great gifts of Silver and Gold and of Pretious things The great value of which after his Death did but accelerate the Resumption of them by him who succeeded in his Throne and shewed the Truth of what is said by Solomon Eccles 5.18 There is a sore evil which I have seen under the Sun namely Riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt 2 Because great Military Power is commonly joyn'd with Treasure as here appears Excess of Treasure and fenced Cities left to younger Sons of Princes commonly destroys them Together with the same he gave them fenced Cities both which many times make the Supreme fearful of such Power not only too great to be subject but greater than his own whereas if they had been left what was Moderate below Envy and above Contempt as the younger Sons of the China Emperors are and thereby enjoy more secure and happy fates than the Sons of the Grand Seignior Persian Negus and Mogul ever attain they might probably have lived and though their Brother Jehoram was wicked never had his hands embrued in their Blood Of the General Custom of Nations of Succession to Kingdoms by Primogeniture and of the Mischief and Civil Wars which have followed by Disinheriting the eldest Son Having shewn the Right of Primogeniture in Successions to Kingdoms from the Law of Nature and Scripture the same likewise appears to be generally the Custom of all Nations That the same Custom was amongst the Aegyptians as we has the Israelites is inferred by Lyra from Exod. 12.29 And it came to pass that at Midnight the Lord smote all the first born of the Land of Aegypt from the first born of Pharoah that sate on his Throne unto the first born of the Captive that was in the Dungeon And that the same Custom continued in the times of the Ptolomies appears Justin 16. So was it amongst the Trojans and Hus succeeded to Troyas as Dares to Phrygius in Lib. De Excid Tro. The same Custom of Succession to Kingdoms by Primogeniture was amongst the Persians Syrians Macedonians Parthians Cretans Rhodians Albans Romans Sicilians Goths Franks Tartars Turks English Scots Hungarians Spaniards and French and the mischiefs
which were Five viz. 1. Don Antonio Son of Lewis second Son of Emanuel 2. Philip the Second King of Spain Grandchild to Emanuel by his eldest Daughter Isabella 3. Philibert Duke of Savoy Grandchild to Emanuel by his second Daughter Beatrix 4. Mary Dutchess of Rarma eldest Daughter of Edward youngest Son of Emanuel 5. Katherine Dutchess of Brigance youngest Daughter of Edward youngest Son of Emanuel Of the Exceptions Declinatory Don Antonio might have made to this Judicatory 1. That 't was no Convention of Estates Elected by the People 2. That the Judges were Elected by the King who became thereby Judge in his own Case for King Henry was only the third Son of Emanuel whereas Antonio's Father Lewis was second Son to Emanuel so he being Son of Henry's elder Brother Henry would be adjudged to restore the Kingdom to him if the Judges were equal and not of Henry's choosing 3. That the Pope and Bishops were inequal Judges they assuming the only Jurisdiction of Marriage and Succession according to the Papal Laws who take Bribes and Sell the Successions of the Kingdom and so become Judges in their own Causes as 't is well known in the Case of the Natural Son of Henry King of Castile who bought a Legitimation of the Pope and thereby excluded his Brother Peter born of a Canonical Marriage after Peter had been admitted to the Throne and acknowledged for King divers years 4. That Pope Julius the Third put forth a Decree against the Promotion of Bastards without the Assent of Don Antonio or the people of Portugal he ought not to be Judged by the Law of a Foreign Prelate who thereby makes himself a Judge in his own Case The Reasons pretended why King Henry 's Judges Adjudged Don Antonio Illegitimate 1. Because he was a Bastard in Reputation but what is this to the purpose what the vulgar think who are Educated and blinded in Popish Superstition and thereby neither understand what Legitimation or Illegitimation means Judges of Legitimation ought to be Wise men and not Fools 2. Because when Pope Julius the Third put forth a Decree against the Promotion of Bastards Don Antonio sued to be exempted and thereby owned his Bastardy and what is it to the purpose what a Foreign Pope who ought to have no Jurisdiction in Portugal Decrees there without the Assent of the People or what Antonio did terrified with the superstitious fear of his Excommunications 3. Because Lewis his Father declared him by his last Will and Testament his Bastard Son To which it may be said That it was Testamentum inofficiosum against the Law of God and against the Law of Nature and void and he himself was therein worse than an Infidel to Illegitimate him whom in the same Testament he acknowledges to be his Son 4. Because Lewis never acquainted any of his Friends with his Marriage nor told his Brother Henry in his Sickness To which it may be said Marriage or no Marriage is a Matter of Law and not of Fact and Lewis being a Papist understood not what it was but according to the Papist Laws which are contrary to the Law of God But 't is manifest he acquainted his Friends and Lewis himself with what was Marriage and what was not according to the Law of God viz. Carnal Knowledge of the Mother with whom he was not Prohibited to Marry by the Law of God and begetting Don Antonio of her besides Henry was no Competent witness in his own Case of what his Brother told him or not 5. Because the witness brought to prove the Marriage of his Mother with his Father Confessed they were suborned thereunto To which may be said These Witnesses prove themselves to be Witnesses Incompetent and are of no value for a suborned Witness will as well Swear false in his Recantation as in his first Testimony It being the common practice of wicked Persons to hire Knights of the Post to testifie at first the same which true Witnesses or other Lawful Probation have proved and after discover they were suborned to draw Suspition on the true Testimony Too much of the same wicked practices have been to dishonour the true Evidence hath been given against the late Horrid Popish Plotters The Reasons alleadged by the other Pretenders to the Crown of Portugal 1. Grandchild by a Daughter and great Grandchild by a Son Couzin German of the first Degree by a Daughter and of the Second by a Son The King of Spain by his Learned Lawyers alleadged against the Dukes of Parma and Brigance that he was Grandchild to Emanuel whereas the two Dukes were great Grand-children and he was Couzin German of the first Degree to Henry the present King in Possession whereas they were only Couzin Germans of the second Degree and so the next Degree of Consanguinity was to be preferred before a more remote Degree and this the Civilians pretended to be a strong Argument in their Law 2. That when John the Base Son of Pedro was Crowned King of Portugal it was to the Injury of the King of Castile the right being in him as having then Married Beatrix the Legitimate Daughter and Heir of Ferdinando King of Portugal Legitimate Son of Pedro and Bastard Brother to Ferdinando Father to Beatrix 3. Because Portugal was given away by a former King of Castile in Marriage with one of his Daughters contrary to the Law of the Land Son of the eldest Daughter of the Son and Son of the eldest Daughter of the Father The Duke of Parma pleaded by Farneso Bishop of Parma That being Son of the eldest Daughter of Edward fourth Son of Emanuel he ought to be preferred before the King of Spain being but Son of a Daughter of Emanuel and therefore he deriving from the Male Line ought to be preferred before him who derives only from the Female Alien and Native Born The Duke of Brigance pleaded his Cause himself and against Spain alleadged the same as Parma did and to Bar Parma who was descended from the eldest Daughter as himself was from the younger Pleaded that Parma was an Alien because an Italian and he a Natural-born Portuguese The Duke of Savoy pleaded his Cause by Charles Renero afterwards a Cardinal but he being descended from a younger Daughter of Emanuel as the King of Spain was from the eldest he was presently excluded as having no colour of Right Besides these Pretenders Queen Catherine of France would have put in her Claim as descended by her Mother from Alphonse but the Claim being groundless they denyed to receive it and so the dispute remained between the King of Spain and the two Dukes of Parma and Brigance But King Henry dying while the business was in hot debate and before he had decided the Controversie the King of Spain making himself Judge in his own Case King Philip Claimed his own Kingdoms from Natural Children but would not allow it in others seized on the Kingdom which he his Son and Grandson
not only then High Treason to Compass the Death Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's Eldest Son but whatsoever else is High Treason against a King will be the same against him Objections chiefly by Buchanan against these Statutes and the Policy of them making Kingdoms Hereditary to the Eldest Sons Answered Object Who is best able to defend a Kingdom should have it Object 1. Salus Populi is above all Statutes and the Power of Kings and Parliaments themselves and above all Acts of Parliament Statutes therefore which Repeal the Ancient Fundamental Laws which were in Great Britain of Election by Parliament and in Ireland by the Custom of Tanistry of Succession of the Brother before the Son such Statutes ought themselves to be repealed and not to repeal those which are better and it being most necessary pro salute Populi that he who is best able to defend a Kingdom against Enemies Foreign and Native and hath learnt the same by Age and Experience should succeed which the Brother being more able and fit to do than the Son ought according to those Ancient and Necessary Customes to succeed before the Son which Custome as to Scotland is recited by Buchaman Mos majorum qui è propinquis Regum defunctorum non proximos sed maximè idoneos eligerent modo à Fergusio primo Scotorum Rege essent oriundi The Custom of Scotland was That the Parliament chose out of the Kindred of the King deceased not the next but the fittest so as they were such as were descendents from Fergusius the first King of the Scots and on this Custome Kenneth the Third who was the Brother of King Duffus was by Election of the Parliamem of Scotland preferred before Milcolumbus the Son of Duffus though a Youth of great hopes which Kenneth began his Reign Anno Dom. 970 and proved a most Valiant and Wife Prince and repell'd a Mighty Invasion of the Danes whom he overthrew in a Battel with a great Slaughter of them but the same Kenneth afterwards inflamed with Ambition Covetousness and Cruelty secretly poysoned Milcolumbus the then Prince of Scotland being the said Son of his Brother Duffus deccased and with great dissimulation counterseiting even Tears and great Grief for him Convened a Parliament at Scone whom partly by Terror and partly by Deceit he got to Abrogate the Law of Succession of Brothers before Sons which had made him King and been the Sanctuary of Publique Safety and Enacted a Law of Succession for his own private and not the Publique Interest clean contrary viz. That the Kingdom should be from that time Hereditary in this manner That his own Eldest Son should be Prince of Scotland That when any King dyed his Eldest Son should next succeed to the Crown and if the Eldest dyed living his Father the Nephew should succeed instead of his Son who dyed And other Constitutions as appears Buchanan rer Scotl. 190 191. Who saith further Kenneth making the Kingdome of Scotland Hereditary tormented in Conscience Ita Rex per scelus posteris uti putabat regno stabilito animum tamen suum confirmare non pot uit c. The King saith he having by so great a Wickedness established his Kingdom as he thought to his Posterity he could not Establish his Mind for although he courted all sorts of Men with the highest shew of Love and Courtesie and so managed the Affairs of the Kingdom that there was nothing wanting which shewed him not a good King Yet his Mind perpetually disquieted with the conscience of his wicked fact suffered him not to have any solid or sincere joy but the thoughts of his foul Crime rushing into his memory vexed him by Day and by Night most horrible Dreams disturbed his rest at length whether truly as some affirm or whether his troubled thoughts made him so fancy what oftentimes happens to Guilty persons a voice came from Heaven by which he seemed in his sleep to be warned Doest thou think the Murder of Milcolumbus an Innocent Person committed by thee most wickedly in Secret is hid from me or that I will any longer suffer it to pass without punishment For already there are Plots laid by Treason which thou shalt not escape to take away thy Life neither shalt thou as thou thinkest leave thy Kingdom Stable or Secure but full of Tumults and Tempests to thy Posterity With which fearful Dream the King being terrified Early in the Morning he flyes to the Bishops and Monks and declares to them the Confusion of his Mind and Anguish of his Conscience for his Crime but they gave him no true Remedy from the Doctrine of Christ for they had already degenerated from the Piety and Learning of the Ancient Professors But advised those many absurdities Long since invented by wicked Persons for their own gains and rashly believed of the Unlearned and Overcredulous That he should inrich with Gifts the Holy Places and Temples and should visit the Sepulchres of the Saints kiss their Reliques redeem his Sins by Masses and Alms and should have a greater Honour and Reverence for the Monks and Priests than he had formerly us'd to have Neither did he omit any of these Explations which he believed would help him But he was notwithstanding after by appointment of Fenella a Lady formerly Injured by him and an Ambuscada of Horse laid for him taken and killed as Buchanan p. 192. after the death of Kenneth and this Intayl of the Crown to his Issue by the Murder of his Brother's Son It appears Buchan rer Scotl. lib. 6. p. 192 193. That Constantinus the Son of Caten called Calvus Constantine Calvus procures the Law of Kenneth to be repealed began to dispute much against the Injustice of this Law to which they were circumvented by fear to assent and thus he begins Quid enim Stultius quam rem unam omnium maximam à prudentium censura Suffragiis ad Arbitrium fortunae revocare c. What saith he is more foolish than to take away a matter of the greatest concern from the Votes of Wise Men in Parliament and to cast it on the Wheel of Fortune and that these should bind themselves to be ruled by a Child who hath the chance to be born and who is ruled by some petty Woman and drive away most Valiant Men from assistance in the Government What if the Children of Kings should have any infirmity of Body or Mind whereby they are utterly disabled to perform necessary Acts of Empire what if Children should have possessed the Kingdom in such time when we fought with the Romans Britons Picts English and Danes not for the Kingdom but for Life or what can be said more Mad than what God threatens to the Contumacious that Children should reign over them as the highest Calamity we should enact as a Law on our selves and the greatest Threats of the Divine Prophets we should either contemn or run headlong into it of our own accord Neither is there any
truth in what the Flatterers of Kenneth boast that by this means the Govetousness and Slaughters of Kindred are avoided Neither are the Treacheries of Guardians less to be feared to the Children of Kings left in Minority than of their Kindred wherefore now the Tyrant being fallen who Ravished our Liberty let us valiantly resume the same and his Law Enacted by force and assented to by fear if it be a Law and not rather a selling us for Slaves let us abrogate and repeal the same and Restore again our Ancient Fundamental Laws which brought forth this Kingdom of nothing and from so small beginnings not only advanced to such an height as is inferiour to none of our Neighbours but when cast down hath again raised the same to its former Strength and let us imbrace the present opportunity while it offers it self which if once Elapsed we may in vain seek again The People are by this perswaded and the Twelfth day after the Funeral of Kenneth he is chosen King Anno Domini 994. And was after Slain in Battel in the Town of Vaumond in Louthian in the Second Year of his Reign And though Milcolumbus or Malcolm the second Son of Kenneth the Third who was so tormented in Conscience for Poysoning the first Son of his Brother Duffus to get an Act to Intayl the Grown to his own Posterity made no Conscience to kill Grinius another Son of the same Duffus in Battel Malcolm Son of Kenneth revives and confirms the Law making the Kingdom hereditary and having by the Success gotten the Power of the Sword into his hand in the Same manner as his Father Kenneth had by force Enacted again by force confirmed at the Same Scone by Parliament the Act of Intayl of the Crown to the Issue of Kenneth Buchanan 196. Yet doth Buchanan the same Historian p. 200 201 censure this Act of changing the Ancient Law of Election by Parliament of the Brother or any other person more fit than the Son to be Injust Imprudent and Infortunate Objections against the Reviver 1. Injust 1. Injustice Because he saith Italex enervat vires consilij publici sine quo nullus Legitimus dominatus potest consistere Such a Law enervates the Strength of Parliaments without which no Lawful Government can be for all Government is either by Conquest or Contract As to Conquest there is none demanded or acknowledged on Such a Title As to Contract there can be none without a Parliament who are the Representative of the People to contract for them 2. Imprudent â— Imprudence Because Propinquorum in eos qui Regno potiuntur insidias et Regnantium adversus eos quos et natura et lex voluit â—â—ique esse Charissimos suspitiones nesarias quas narrationis or do Exphrabit tot priorum Seciâ—â—orum clades cum illis collatae calamitatibus quae Alexandri tertij interitum sunt consecutae Leves prae ijs tolerabiles videri possunt The Treacheries of Kindred against those who enjoy the Kingdom and the wicked Suspitions of those who Reign against them who by the Bonds of Nature and Law they ought to esteem most dear as this discourse in order shall declare And the Slaughters of so many former Ages compared with the Calamities which hereby followed the death of Alexander the Third were light and tolerable Note Alexander the Third began his Reign Anno Domini 1649. he Married first Margaret Daughter to Henry the Third King of England by whom he had Alexander the Prince David and Margaret who married Hangonamus or as some call him Ericus Son to Magnus 4th King of Norway who bare him a Daughter commonly called the Maiden of Norway The Maiden of Norway had United England and Scotland if she had lived Skene And concerning this Lady of Norway saith Buchanan Lib. 8. p. 241. Edvardus Anglorum Rex gnarus suae sororis neptem Regis Norvegiae filiam unam Ex Alexandri posteris esse superstitem Eandemque Regni Scotorum Legitimam Heredem Legatos ad eam deposcendam filio suo in Scotiam misit c. Edward the First King of England knowing his Neice the Daughter of the King of Norway to be the only Remaining Issue of Alexander the Third and Lawful Heir to the Crown of Scotland he sent his Ambassadours into Scotland to ask her in Marriage for his Son They when they Argued much in the Publique Gonvention of the Publique Benefit which would ensue such Marriage they found the Minds of the Scots not Dis-inclined from that affinity for Edward was a man of great Courage and of great Power and Ambition of greater And the glory of his Valour in the Holy Warr while his Father was alive and in Subduing Wales after his death shone bright Neither could they ever Remember the Scotish and English name to have been nearer Conjoyned than under the Last Kings Neither could old Hostility be more Commodiously abolished then if there were an Union made of both Nations upon Honest and Equal Conditions The Marriage was therefore Readily Assented unto and Conditions added by Mutual assent of both That the Scots should so long use their own Laws and Magistrates till such Children should be born of the same as were able to Reign And if none should happen to be procreated or being born should dye before their Lawful age Then the Kingdom of Scotland should go to the next of the Blood-Royal Things being thus Agreed Michael or as others mention Daevid Wemes and Michael Scot two Knights of Fife of great Repute for their Prudence with their Country in those Times were sent Embassadors to Norway but they because Margaret for that was the Young Ladies Name dyed before their Arrival returned home sad and nothing done by whose immature death there arose such Controversie as vehemently shook England and almost destroyed the Name of the Scots For to go on with the History as he and other Writers Relate it not withstanding this new Act of Intayling the Crown Ten Competitors arose to the Crown of Scotland notwithstanding the Act of Reviver making the same hereditary there arose Ten Competitors for the Succession Erick King of Norway Florence Earl of Holland Robert Bruce Earl of Anandale John de Baliol Lord of Galloway John de Hastings Lord of Abergaveny John Cumyn Lord of Badenair Patrick de Dunbar Earl of March John de Vesey Nicholas de Hues William de Ross All or the most part of them alledging themselves descended from David Earl of Huntingdon Younger Brother to William King of Scots and Great Uncle to the late King Alexander But the Principal and most Potent Factions which contended were that of Balyol and Bruce On which saith Sir Richard Baker Hist 96. broke out the Mortal Dissention between the Two Nations which consumed more Christian Blood and continued longer And the Wars between the Factions of Baliol and Bruce then any Quarrel we read of ever did between any Two People in the
World for he that began it could not end it but it lasted almost Three Hundred Years and was never throughly abolished till it pleased God to Unite the Discordant Blood of the Three Kingdoms in King James Which Discords had never happened amongst these Ten Competitors had not the Ancient Law of Electing by Parliaments the fittest of the Blood-Royal whereby generally Brothers were Elected before Sons been abolished A very Imprudent way therefore is it to design for Publique Peace what Experience shews to have the greatest cause of perpetual Wars for so long a time as 300 years together The like Civil Wars in England followed between York and Lancaster from Generation to Generation and this Statute of Treason prevented not the same The Civil Wars between York and Lancaster not prevented by the Statute making the Eldest Son Heir Another Imprudence Buchanan mentions p. 201. Vt Reges videlicet constituamus quibus alij Rectores praeficiendi in eorum potestatem universum tradamus populum qui ipsi sui potestatem non habent qui aegre Regibus usu rerum peritis prudentia praestantibus parent poscimus ut qualibuscunque Regum umbris pareant That we should constitute Kings to govern who must have others set over them to govern themselves and that we should deliver the whole People into their Power who have not power over themselves and that we should require of such who will hardly obey the best Kings and most Excellent in Experience and Wisdom to obey any shadows of Kings shall be set over them Imprudence of attempts by such Acts to perpetuate a Name or Race Of a third Imprudence and Infortunateness incident in this to Princes themselves he sayes Quod autem privatunt ex hac Lege petunt Reges Emolumentum ut generis et nominis perpetuitatem inde sibi promittunt id quam sit vanum et fallax c. That the private profit which Kings seek out of this Law being the Perpetuity of their Race and Name is very vain and deceitful not only in manifold ancient Examples but Nature it self may teach them if they will consider with how many Laws and Rewards the Romans endeavoured to perpetuate the Famous Names of their Families of whom there remains now not the least sign in the whole World conquered by them And deservedly I think this happens to them who contend to give Eternity which neither themselves have nor can have to a thing in its nature so flying and frail and every moment obnoxious to all Casuality as cannot be capable of Stability And attempt the same by such a way as is most contrary to their design for what is less faithful to Diuturnity then Tyranny but to the same this new Law prepares the way and a Tyrant is the universal mark of the hate of Mankind for whom it is impossible to stand long and when he falls he draws the Ruine of his whole Family with him This Endeavour of Foolish Men the Deity seems to me many times to break with a Contemptuous stroak and sometimes as a Competitor with him in Power to expose it to publique derision And I know not whether there can be any more fit or manifest Example of the Divine Pleasure than in him whom we now mention Malcolm the Author of the Law of Succession of Eldest Sons dyed without a Son For Milcolumbus who so much Laboured to confirm by Parliament a Law Enacted by his Father by force for the Succession of the Sons of Kings in their Fathers room left no Issue Male behind him And as to his two Daughters one of them called Beatrice he matched to a Noble-man call'd Crinus a Thane of the Western Isles and a Chief of the other Thanes whom that Age call'd an Athan. The other call'd Doaca he match'd to the Thane of Angus by whom was begot Macbeth of whom I shall speak further in his proper place and indeed do we not find in all Ages the greatest Races sooner destroyed than the meaner And if any have escaped the Tempest of Time they have not been the Lofty Cedars but the humble shrubs Where are now all the Races of Gyants of the Old World Where are now the Races of the Egyptian Gods who in the reputed forms of Men reigned on the Earth Where is the Race of Nimrod the Founder of the Assyrian Of Arbaces the Founder of the Median Of Cyrus the Founder of the Persian Empire The Crown endureth not to every Generation Is not the saying of Solomon true Prov. 27.24 Riches are not for ever and doth the Crown endure to every Generation 2. This new Law of intayling to Sons though it may preserve the Counterfeit name yet destroys the true Fame of the Father which is call'd Children of the same Name destroy the Name of the Father Isa 56.5 a Name better then of Sons and Daughters As there were so many Pharaohs that the Chronologists are by the Ears and cannot agree which was the Pharaoh when Abraham went into Egypt which was the Pharaoh Entertained Joseph which was the Pharaoh commanded the Male Children to be destroyed And which was the Pharaoh was drowned in the Sea The like of the Dariusses and of the Herods though they were but few and many others Many other Names and Races whereby there can be no Encouragement of Fame to Vertuous Actions for Publique good nor Discouragement to Vitious by Infamy who are causes of Publique Evils whereas on the contrary as is well observed by Sir Francis Bacon Actions of the highest Fame and of greatest Merit to the Publique have been done by the unmarried and Childless Men yea we find this Vanity of Intayling the Father's Name so much slighted by the great Nestorian Church in Persia that if after Marriage a Male-Child were born Father lost his Name to his Son in Persia the Father lost his own Name and was called by the Name of his Eldest Son as if the Father's name was Moses and the Son's name Joseph the Father was no more called Moses but Aben-Joseph that is the Father of Joseph Heylin 660. And we find though Darius destroyed Belshazzar the Son of the Conquering Nebuchadnezzer and Cassander the Children and Mother of the Great Alexander and Augustus destroyed Caesarian the Son of the Renowned Julius Caesar whereby the Race of every one of these Conquerours became Extinguished soon after their death yet we hear the Names of the Fathers resound to this Day more gloriously from the single Trumpet of Fame than they could have done from the weak Cryes of Infants in a Numerous Off-spring had they left a Posterity 3. It is said against this Law of Intayling to Sons That though the Royal Lines are not alwaies so suddenly Extinguished as in the Last Examples Yet the Periods of them and their Heirs Male and of Races and Kingdoms themselves are fatal and as some Polititians observe terminate most with about the Term of about 500 Years many
under Imprudent to seek to perpetuate Races against Nature Fate and Providence which are irresistible few above So in the Ancient Kingdom of the Egyptians there were above Twenty Dynastyes at the Period of every one of which the Race of that King who began to Rule the Dynastye Either Expired or was Extinguished or Destroyed and it is easie to see how many Races and Names of several Kings have in short time worn out and been changed to new both in England Scotland France Spain c. It is in vain therefore by human Laws to seek to resist the Decrees of God and perpetuate a Race which God hath appointed to Determine Seeing as Solomon saith Eccles 9.11 The Race is not to the swift nor the Battel to the strong neither yet Bread to the wise nor yet Riches to men of understanding nor yet Favour to men of skill And it is said Dan. 4. The Most High Ruleth in the Kingdom of men and giveth it to whomsoever he will Better therefore both to Princes and Subjects is the Counsel of Christ Matth. 6.33 Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and his Righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you Dan. 7.27 Whose Kingdom is an Everlasting Kingdom And as is said Psal 16.11 In his Presence is fulness of Joy at his Right Hand are Pleasures for evermore Answ 1 Answ 1. As to the first Objection That the Brother ought to be preferred before the Son and Liberty left according to ancient Custom to the Parliament to Elect him if he is Judged fittest for Succession And that the Brother is alwaies most fit and more for the Safety of the Kingdom he being alwaies of greater Age and Experience than the Son who may chance to be a Child and more need Tutors and Governours himself than to Govern others As to which part of the Reason of possibility of Minority in the Son I answer First That à Posse ad esse non valet Argumentum And with all due Honour had to the Age and Experience of others the Eldest Son is here no Infant or Minor But hath attained to a higher Maturity and Flower of Age and Strength than Alexander the Great who began at Twenty to Conquer the World and hath shewn already the Highest Proof of Valour in War and Affection to Religion and Justice in Peace Secondly admit it should happen the Eldest Son to be an Infant or Minor as the intention of this Statute is it may which make it notwithstanding his Infancy Treason to Practise against him And though an Eldest Son should be left at the Death of any King an Infant or Minor yet by the Mercy of God the Righteousness of the Title and a standing Parliament During the Minority The Infant and Kingdoms are as Safe as if he were of full Age And more Safe than in the hand of a Collateral Heir of full Age whose Guardianship is most dangerous to a Lineal Heir Answ 2 Answ 2. As to the Reason That it is more for the Fame of Vertue for the Father to have none of his name Than to have his name Lost amongst a Multitude of the same names derived from him to numerous Posterity I shall answer in the words of Buchanan in another place on another dispute p. 406. Quod si de honore unus Et non de omnium salute hic esset disputatio Ego quoque facile ac Lubens ad eorum sententiam accederem verum cum de eo Statuendum sit hodie quod omnium privatorum vitam Et fortunam quod totius Regni incolumitatem complectitur huic uni câ—gitationi omnes Singulorum rationes concedere oportet Answ 3 Answ 3. As to that Reason of the Objection That Periods of Royal Races and Successions to Kingdoms are natural in regard the subject matter is so frail as not to be Capable of Perpetuity and fatal in regard God hath appointed the same by an Immutable Decree and Providential in regard it is often likewise effected by a particular Providence and seeing the Laws by which God Governs the World God governs the World by the Lawes of Nature Fate and Providence are the Law of Nature the Law of Fate and the Law of Providence quae supra nos nihil ad nos they are irresistible and all Human Laws to cause or avoid their effects are in vain To which is answer'd and gladly acknowledg'd That God is pleased to Govern the World by all these Three Lawes First the Law of Nature which is his Decree of Subordination of Causes Secondly the Law of Fate which is his Decree of Co-ordination of Causes to such Ends as to his Wisedom seem best These two are the Greatest Imperial and Immutable Law of the World and against these it is not only folly and a Sin to make Common Laws or Acts of Parliament Not lawful to pray against the Law of Nature or Fate but even to pray Desine fata Deum flecti sperare precando Hope not from Prayers thou Thy Fate from God canst bow Thirdly The Law of Providence which is the Regulation of Accidents which are neither Decreed nor Immutable And this is the Law Paternal Prayers not only Lawful but necessary in matters reserved to Providence by which he Governs all his Creatures sensible of Good and Evil. And as to this Law of Providence human Laws Endeavours and Prayers are not only Lawful in such as are Capable to Pray but necessary to obtain the good and to avert the evil and both these are acknowledged by the Heathen Poets themselves Sed satis est orasse Jovem qui donat et aufert Det vitam Det opes aequum mî animum ipse parabo Hor. lib. 1. ad Lollium Epist Flectitur Iratus voce Rogante Deus Ovid. But if we will take our Limitations of Prayer from Christians they must have alwaies these two That they must be Lawful that is not contrary to any revealed Law or Will of God and likewise be alwaies with submission to his Secret Will The Law Moral a Fourth Law by which God governs the World I Answer therefore That though the Three Laws mentioned are great and wonderful Wages by which God governs the World in general and Successions to Kingdoms in particular yet they are not the only Lawes by which he doth it but there is a Fourth Law as great as any of the former which is the Law Moral the obligation of which is Reward and Punishment which not Improperly may be called a Law Magistratical for as God is the Supreme King and Father so is he likewise Supreme Magistrate of the World and beareth not the Sword in vain And this Law may only be Exercised and the Obligations thereof laid on the most Noble Subjects who are so in Three respects First In regard of their Knowledg as the Law Moral can only be Exercised over the Subjects Sensible and Intellectual What Subjects liable to the Law Moral and
what not and what lyable to the Lawes of Nature Fate and Providence whereas the Laws of Fate and Nature may be Exercised both over these and over Subjects Ignorant Insensible Irrational Foolish Mad-men and deprived of all Intellect alike Secondly in regard of their ability as the Law Moral can be only Exercised on persons able to perform it but the Laws of Nature Fate and Providence over Babes new born Blind Deaf Dumb Maimed and the Dead themselves Thirdly in regard of Liberty as the Law Moral can only be Exercised over free Agents but the Lawes of Nature Fate and Providence may be Exercised over necessary Agents forced Agents Bond-men Slaves Captives Prisoners and persons in Chains and Fetters Though therefore all humane Actions are under one of these four Laws a Man is a necessary Agent as to the Law of Nature and a forced Agent to the Law of Fate and Providence and a free Agent as to the Moral Law yet seeing he may be in many things Ignorant when he is Ruled by Nature when by Fate when by Providence Not revealed to Man by which of these four Laws he doth Act in any particular Action and when by the Moral Law and consequently it may be secret and not revealed unto him when he is a necessary agent when a forced agent and when a free agent or in the more Common word when his Will is free and when Bond In this Ignorance therefore of all the other Three Secret Laws he ought to act according to the Moral Law which God hath revealed and promulgated alwaies and according to the other Three when God hath in particular Acts of his own manifested his Will in them as it is an Act of God that an Eldest Son is born who is an Infant or Minor And a Brother born who is a Major and this Act of God is good and of great Mercy but that on this Act of God Murder should be Committed or Civil Wars be unjustly Raised is Evil and an Act of Man and God is not the Author of this Sin and though no humane Law could have caused or prevented this of the Infancy of a Son or Majority of a Brother yet may and ought human Laws prevent or punish the wicked acts of men which may ensue thereon in attempts to Murder either and seeing God by his Moral Law hath Commanded Powers to be a Terror to Evil Doers it is their Duty therefore And if they neglect it the bear the Sword in vain to make Laws to prevent and punish them and not to leave Infants and Subjects Exposed in such a Wilderness of Dangers as this is of Succession because its possible Fate may destroy them notwithstanding the greatest human care and Providence may without any such care taken at all preserve them Which Stoical and Epicuraean Follies of fata regunt homines fatis agimur Cedite fatis or Res humanas ordine nullo fortuna regit or vita regitur Fortuna non Sapientia to Extend beyond their Bounds prescribed by God or to all humane Actions because ordained and permitted in some were like the Ridiculous Pagan Divinity derived from none but such Authors Not to sow because Fate may destroy the Harvest with it and Providence may give an Harvest without it Not to wear Arms in War because Fate may destroy with them and Providence may preserve without them Not to do good Works because if Predestinated to be Damn'd thou shalt be Damn'd with them And if Predestinated to be Saved thou shalt be saved without them I should not have thought this of Fate worth the objecting or answering had I not found the same Actually press'd in the most Excellent Historian and Statist that ever writ in the Isle of Great Britain for such was Buchanan out of whom I have recited it Answ 4 To the Objection of the Civil Wars between Baliol and Bruce and York and Lancaster notwithstanding the Succession of the Crown ascertained to the Kings Eldest Son Answ 4. As to the Calamities of Civil Wars which followed between Baliol and Bruce in Scotland and the Houses of York and Lancaster in England notwithstanding the Laws in both Kingdoms making the Crown Hereditary to the Eldest Son And that such Lawes did not prevent the same I Answer first As to Scotland the effect of the Law of Primogeniture could not be expected where there was no Eldest Son surviving nor on the Death of Margaret of Norway so much as an Heir Lineal Male or Female left but if there had been an Eldest Son left there is no appearance of any thing against it but the Crown of Scotland had never Returned to the Line of the Earl of Huntingdon but remained in the Line of King Alexander the Third who was the last Possessor which would have prevented all those Ten Competitors to claym from Huntingdon and consequently the Wars between Baliol and Bruce Then as to the Civil Wars in England if Richard the Second had left a Son there appears no probability that ever there had been a Civil War between York and Lancaster Besides if when there is an Eldest Son left as was by Edward the Fourth and an younger Son with him and notwithstanding there followed a new Civil War between York and Lancaster in the Persons of Richard the Third and Henry the Seventh first though this Law of Primogeniture in Succession did not prevent it And though the Law make it High Treason to Compass the death of the Eldest Son yet could it not prevent the Murder of both the Sons To which I answer That it is not to be Imputed as a fault to the Statute or Law that some wicked persons dare break it but is notwithstanding of greater use as the Statutes which make it High Treason to Counterfeit the Kings Seal or to Clip Money and Felony to Rob on the High-Way Though many have notwithstanding Counterfeited the Seal Clipt Money and Rob'd on the High-way yet are not these Statutes Useless but a great Security to the People for though there are now a few if there were no such Statute at all there would be multitudes of Malefactors Richard the Third designing to Murder his Brother's Sons first slandered them with Illegitimacy Besides as to the Particular Instance of Edward the Fourth it was his Inadvertency and indeed Imprudence to Commit the Guardianship of his Son in Minority to his Brother who thereupon forged Illegitimacy against them and Murdered them And it was done for want of such a Law of Succession as was Enacted by Kenneth the Third and Malcolme Mackenneth the Second in Scotland which according to Buchanan lib. 6. p. 191. was A Guardian by the Law of Scotland to be Elected by Parliament during the Minority of the Prince Vt Rege Impubere Tutor qui pro Rege esset interea Eligeretur vir prudentia opibus insignis qui ad quartodecimum usque Annum Regis nomine rem administraret Ad id aetatis
ubi Rex pervenerit ipsi sibi curatores Eligere posset That the King being under the Age of Fourteen Years Election should be made of a Guardian of great Estate and Wisdom who should be his Regent in the mean while and Administer his Affairs in the King's Name till he arrived at the Age of Fourteen and when he came to that Age he himself might choose his own Guardians Which Election of a Guardian must be intended to be by Parliament for it appears by the words That the Infant or Minor King must not nor is able to choose himself till he come to the Age of Fourteen And it is contrary to Reason that any other should be his own Judge to choose himself to have to himself to his own use the Custody of the Person of the King Dangerous to Commit the Guardianship of a Minor prince to the next Major in whom all his Subjects have an Interest And it would be very Dangerous to the Infant if he who is next Successor to the Crown should get the Custody of the Heir into his hands There is no Third Power can be therefore above Exception who ought to choose the Guardian of an Infant King but the Parliament And accordingly we find it to be the constant Practice of that Kingdom as appears Buchanan Lib. 19. p. 687. when it is said Sed cum homines usu rerum Edocti Perspicerint vix fieri posse ut in tanta fortunae inconstantia non aliquando in pueros aut alioqui Regno ineundo Impares haeredes jus summi Magistratus inciderit c. But when taught by Experience men saw that it could not be but in so great inconstancy of Fortune but the Right of the Supreme Magistracy might fall amongst Children or other Heirs unfit to Govern a Kingdom they Ordained That in the mean time one should be Elected Regent who Excell'd the rest in Estate and Counsel Guardians chosen by Parliament the only Security of Kings in Minority and our Ancestors following this way for the space of Six hundred Years have transmitted thereby the Kingdom safe to Posterity So Robert Bruce being dead Thomas Randolph Earl of Murray and Donald Earl of Mar Andrew Murray John Randolph Robert Stuart succeeded singly and sometimes more number are by Parliament chosen into that place So James II. being a child Alexander Leviston being of no Kin nor of the chief Rank of Nobility but only a Knight and of more repute for Prudence then Antient Descent was elected to be his Guardian Neither can there be alledged any want of persons of the Royal Stock to have been the cause of such choice for there was at that time John Kennedy chief of his Family and King James his Nephew by his Sister there were his Uncles James Kennedy Archbishop of St. Andrews Primate of the whole Kingdom in all kind of Vertue and his Brother born of the Kings Aunt Douglass Earl of Angus was not remote from the Kings Blood Archibald Earl of Douglas in Power almost equal to the King and superiour to any of the rest yet did none of these complain of any Injustice in the Parliament for making another choice and not long after four Guardians were given to James III. not taken for the Kindred but chosen by Parliament It was but of late that John Duke of Albin was sent for by the Nobility out of France to moderate the Affairs of Scotland James I. being then a child and was confirmed by a publick Act of Parliament Neither was it done because he was next of Kin for he had an Elder Brother called Alexander But James I. being absent Robert his Uncle ruled the Kingdom And with what Right Was he taken for nearness of Blood No he was chosen by the People Nor so neither How then was he created When Robert III. was so sick in body and mind that he was not able to discharge his Office he made his Brother Robert his Vice-Roy and commended his Children to him So his Brother starved to death David his Eldest Son and sought how to destroy likewise James his Younger had he not escaped by slight But he being now placed in possession of his Tyranny and his Brother dead with grief without Parliament or assent of the People he kept it and by force left it to his Son Mordach c. Buchanan proceeds p. 688. Quid enim minus justum esse poterat quam aetatem innoxiam atque infirmam ejus fidei committere qui pupilli sibi crediti mortem semper expectat optat What can be more injust then to commit the innocent and weak Age to one who always hopes for or wishes the death of the Pupil intrusted in his hands And after he saith Laodice the Queen of the Cappadoceans is related to have killed every one of her children as in order they arrived at fourteen years of age to gain thereby a little more time to reign If a Mother will destroy her Children to get the use of a little time what shall we think will their old Enemies dare yea will they not dare to do inflamed with the Brands of Covetousness to cruelty against a Child hindering their hopes of a perpetual Kingdom If this Example seems old and obscure or far-fetch'd I will add more clear and nearer home For who is so ignorant of things so lately acted as he knows not Galeacius Sfortia though at mans Estate though married and the Son in Law of a Potent King to be killed by Lodowick his Uncle Or to whom are the Calamities unknown which ensued that cruel Parricide the most beautiful Region of Italy brought almost to a Devastation the Sfortian Family The not abolishing Episcopal Laws which pretend to Illegitimate whom they please the sense of the Murder of Edward V. and his Brother so fruitful of valiant men destroyed Barbarians let into the most pleasant Country watered by Po. Against whose Rapine nothing was safe against whose Cruelty nothing was secure Who hath been born in the soil of Great Britain and hath not heard of the cruel Murder by Richard III. King of England of the Sons of his Brother Edward IV A great cause of the murder likewise of these Princes was that Papal and Episcopal Laws were not abolished which pretend to illegitimate whom they please Answ 5 Making a Kingdom hereditary to the eldest Son weakens not the Power of Parliaments And 5. as to the Reason against these Statutes which maketh the Crown hereditary to the eldest Son that the same enervate the strength of Parliaments and without a Contract made by every Prince with a Parliament no Government can be just in regard if he receives not the Kingdom by Contract he assumes it by Conquest which over a Free Nation is unjust To which is answered First that these Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which entail the Crown to the Eldest Son do no way weaken but confirm and establish the Power of Parliaments and
Exercise of the same for the Publick safety 1 In regard the Entail being made to the Eldest Son by Act of Parliament the same declares that what is given by Act of Parliament may be taken by Act of Parliament and that every former Act inacted may by a latter Act be repealed according to the known Rule Vnumquodque dissolvitur eodem modo quo conflatum est Secondly according to the General Examples of Acts of Parliament amongst which nothing is more common than for later Acts to change the Entails of the Crown made by former Acts. Thirdly This Power of Parliaments is expresly declared by Act of Parl. 13 El. 1. still in force by which it is enacted that to affirm that the Laws and Statutes do not bind the Right of the Crown and the Descent Limitation Inheritance and Governance thereof is High Treason Fourthly All the Reason alledged of the Antient Custom of New Election of the Successor on every Descent is only lest the Eldest Son should happen to be an Infant or otherwise unfit for Government that the Parliament might choose the fittest which here is satisfied in the Eldest Son who is above all exception known to be the fittest who can be chosen Fifthly though this reserve of Power remain naturally in Parliaments to repeal and change former Acts concerning Succession by new Acts when there is just and necessary cause yet it is necessary likewise there should be a praevious Act to mark out the Heir in whose name the Parliament shall be called to declare the Succession or Guardianship if he happen to be an Infant And what if after a King happens to die there happen a Rebellion or Invasion which makes it impossible to assemble a Parliament will it not be a great safety to the People that a standing Act of Parliament hath before hand appointed the Successor to take care of the Kingdoms till he can call a Parliament to give their assistance therein There is nothing therefore can be justly excepted against these two Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland for ascertaining by Law the Eldest Son to be Heir to the Crown The excellency of the two said Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which ascertain the Succession of the Crown to the Kings Eldest Son But it were a great unthankfulness to the Providence of God to undervalue such Laws whereby all Accidents are obviated Questions and Doubts resolved and Objections answered by so few words as two Lines in each and the Peace of Succession preserved in Great Britain for so many hundred years which in other Empires and Kingdoms cannot be effected without those horrid Murders of Younger Brothers by Elder or Elder Brothers by Younger of lineal Heirs by collateral or collateral Heirs by lineal of Sons by Fathers or of Fathers by Sons whereby Civil Wars Devastations and Ruines of Kingdoms have ensued and that the want of such Statutes or the Breach of them have been causes of these Evils and Enjoyment of them hath been the Cure will I hope appear in the Objections and Answers following Objections first against the not being of the Kings Eldest Son within these Statutes answered Object Obj. 1. That the Lady his Mother was not a Queen therefore the Kings Eldest Son is not within the Statute Answ Statute false translated in the word Queen Answ To this the answer is easie and clear that the word Madame sa Compaigne are falsly translated our Lady his Queen and ought to have been translated our Lady his Companion which is proved by the Reasons following 1. Because 't is manifest sa Compaigne signifies not the word Queen in specie but any Lady Companion in general 2. Because it is manifest the makers of this Act of Parliament intended not to restrain their several meaning onely to a Queen for they knew Royne was French for Queen as well as Roy for King and if they had intended so could have more certainly and easily said Compas le mort nostre Seignior le Roy sa Royne than Madame sa Compaigne 3. Because at the time of making this Statute the famous Black Prince being the Eldest Son to Edward III. was married to Joan Daughter to Edmund Earl of Kent and had Issue by her Richard of Bourdeaux after King of England and none doubts but it was the intention of the King Edward III. who passionately affected his Grandchild Richard that in case the Princes Wife should happen to die in his life time whereby she should not have been a Queen but that notwithstanding if the Black Prince had happened to have survived him which he did not and been King his Eldest Son Richard should have benefit of this Statute 4. It would have been made doubtful by the Bishops who usurped then the Papal Supremacy over Princes of giving or refusing to give them Coronation when they pleased whether the Kings Wife should be titled Queen if the Bishop refused her Coronation Ralph of Canterbury refuseth to Crown Adeliza Queen unless he should first discrown the King as Ralph Archbishop of Canterbury did to Adeliza the second Wife of H. I. unless the Kings would suffer him to pull off the Crown first from the Kings head and new Crown him in acknowledgment that the Supremacy of the Coronation Office belonged to Ralph the Archbishop Bak. Hist 43. Touching which Office of Coronation of Kings and Queens that it belongs to Parliaments and not to Bishops and that David himself was both crowned and anointed by his Parliament and not by the Priest is shewn lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 169 c. 5. The Law of Saxons and Scots that no Wife of a King should be called Queen Because the Title of Queen was then under Envy and doubtful whether not against the antient Law both of England and Scotland the same not appearing to have been repealed by any Act of Parliament Bak. Hist fol. 6. saith a Law was made by the West Saxons that no Wife of a King should be called a Queen fol. 8. that it was so rigorously observed that when Ethelwolph had married Judith the Beautiful Daughter of the Emperour Charles the Bald in honour of whom in his own Court he ever placed her in a Chair of State with all other Majestical Complements of a Queen contrary to the Law of the West Saxons made to avoid the great Expence of Treasure incident to great Titles and Ceremonies and against other inconveniences and so much displeased his Lords thereby that they were ready to have Deposed him but were prevented by his death not long after Buchanan Rev. Scot. 407. takes notice of this Law and says Saxones lege caverunt ne ulla deinceps Regis Vxor Regina vocaretur aut in sede honoris in publico Regi assideret And 406. mentions the like Law in Scotland Quas Reginas alii suo quisque sermone nos Regum uxores appellamus nec altioris fastigii nomen ullum in iis agnoscimus
disinherits the true Children and Aliments and Inherits the false For shame take away such wickedness amongst Christians which is not to be found among Infidels This hath already been shewn to be the wicked Practice of Episcopal and Common Lawyers Paâ—oâ—nized by Judge Rikhil Littleton and Coke contrary to the Law of God where the Husband is within the Four Seas at the time of begetting the Child and gives power to disinherit the right and intrude Adulterous Heirs not only into private Families but Kingdoms Of which take a strange attempt emboldened on this absur'd Popish Principle That adulterous Children born within Matrimony are inheritable to the Husband of the Adulteress and not to the Adulterer Anno 1459. Henry of Spain being himself unable for generation persuaded his Queen to be got with Child by Bertrand of Guttua Joane thus gotten is Proclaimed Heir and Bertrand is made Earl of Ledesma and Duke of Albuquerk Hist Hisp The People force him to reject his supposed Daughter and to declare his Brother Alphonsus and he refusing they Depose him and Crown Alphonsus Hist Hisp Henry overcometh Queen Joane hath two Children more by another Minion Alphonsus dieth Isabel the King's Sister refuseth the Kingdom she is declared Heir and Marrieth Ferdinand of Aragon Hist Hisp Anno 1474. Divers joyn for Joane with Alf. of Portugal who meant to Marry her But Anno 1480. she entreth into a Monastery and Alf. of Portugal Here Joane was born within Matrimony and the Certificate of the Bishop and the Doctrine of Judge Rikhil if it had been sent for would have made Joane Heir but the very light of Nature taught the People though in a Countrey blinded with Popish Superstition that she was not the true Heir by the Law of God but by Fiction therefore they would not bear it Bishops Certificates make adulterous Children honorable and true Children base 18. The Certificate slanders and dishonours the true and makes honourable the false and Adulterous Children as appears in the before-mentioned form of Certificate of Bastardy That the under-named N. H. of T. A. H. of P. J. H. of P. and E. H. of P. are Bastards and every of them a Bastard He makes Bastards by Bundles 't is as easie to him as cracking of Nuts and though 1 Cor. 6.10 after other bad Company mentioned it is said No Revilers shall inherit the Kingdom of God yet the mouth of this Certificate is full of Revilings and devours no less than four Innocents at once who against others might have had their Actions of Slander but against a pretended Jure Divino of an Episcopen Slander there 's no Remedy to be had Certificates destroy Truth and found on Fictions and Lies 19. The Certificates undermine the Pillar of Truth and lays the Foundation of Marriage and Filiation on Fictions and Lies As that Sponsa before a Priest in a Temple is Vxor That Verba De Praesenti are Facta de praeterito futuro That Prohibited Marriages are Null and void That feigned and void Marriages are by Licence and Dispensation true and valid That Intention is Contract Contract is Tradition Obligation is Propriety and Promise is Gift Si donare vocas promittere nec dare Cai Vincam te donis muneribúsque mâ—is Mart. That a Child is not Sib or Kin or of Consanguinity or the Child of the Father who begot or the Mother who bare him or they of him of which see more Lib. 2. p. 154 155. That Children begot by Adulterers were begot by the Husband within the four Seas That two Persons are Transubstantiated into one Person by the words of Priests pronouncing them Man and Wife L. 1. p. 66. with many other which I forbear here to repeat All which are meer Fictions and Falsities and to be Abhorred to be Tolerated to support Ceremonial Mock-Marriage against the true Marriage according to the Moral Law of God Bishops Certificates inconsistent with the right of Primogeniture 20. The Certificate disinherits Primogeniture in Succession to Kingdoms contrary to this Statute and contrary to the Law of God and Nature Patritius Lib. 9. De Regn. T. 22. says Jus naturae exigit Gentium Consuetudo confirmat ut Maximus natu Ex filiis Mortuo Regi succedat And Tiraquel in Praefat. de Jure Primog with this agrees the Rule that Deus facit Haeredes And no other sign can be in the Law of Nature interpreted to come from God but Primogeniture of a Son with which likewise agrees the Scripture Deut. 21.15 If a man have two women for that 's the Original and it is falsly Translated Si fuerit alicui duae Vxores one beloved and another hated and they have born him Children both the beloved and the hated And if the first born Son be hers that is hated Then it shall be when he shall make his Sons to inherit that which he hath That he may not make the Son of the beloved First born before the Son of the hated which is indeed the First born But he shall acknowledge the Son of the hated for the First born by giving him a double Portion of all that he hath for he is the beginning of his Strength the Right of the First born is his The other Text of Scripture is Jehosophat gave the Kingdom to his eldest Son and Gifts to his younger 2 Chro. c. 21.1 Now Jehosophat slept with his Fathers and was buried with his Fathers in the City of David and Jehoram reigned in his stead And he had Brethren the Sons of Jehosophat Azariah and Jehiel and Zechariah and Azariah and Michael and Sephatiah all these were the Sons of Jehosophat King of Israel and their Father gave them great Gifts of Silver and of Gold and of precious things with fenced Cities in Judah But the Kingdom he gave to Jehoram because he was his First born Now when Jehoram was risen up to the Kingdom of his Father he strengthned himself and slew all his Brethren with the Sword and divers also of the Princes of Israel And 2 King 8.18 And he walked in the ways of the Kings of Israel as did the House of Ahab for the Daughter of Ahab was his Wife and he did evil in the sight of the Lord. Which Texts the one for Primogeniture in private Families the other for the same in Successions to Kingdoms make such Right appear very strong in both and these Observations tending to the same may be taken from them 1. That though the Eldest Son be the Son of a second Woman Married after the first yet if the Son of the second be the Son First born before the Son of the first he shall be preferred in the Succession 2. Though the second Woman is an unlawful Woman for here are the highest Circumstances which can make a Woman unlawful for the first Woman is still alive and hath born the Husband Children as well as the second For the words of the Text are They have born
that have insued by disinheriting of Primogeniture either wholly or by Division of Succession into several Kingdoms have been Infinite Amongst the Persians Cyrus the younger Brother by the assistance of Parisatis the Queen Mother contending for Succession against Artaxerxes the eldest raised such Wars and drew in such Foreign Forces of Greeks as the same ceased not till himself was slain by the Army of Artaxerxes The Civil Wars between Hircamus the eldest and Aristobulus the younger Son could not be ceased till Pompey by the Roman Power restored the Kingdom to Hircanus the eldest Disinheriting the eldest Son causeth Patricides Matricides and Fratricides How many Patricides or Matricides or Fratricides this hath caused appears as to the first two by the Examples of Alphonsus the Tenth King of Castile of Gabriel the younger Son of the Marquess of Salusse who by assistance of his Mother cast his elder Brother into Prison pretending he was out of his Wits who breaking out of Prison recovered his Principality and having chased out his Brother Coupt up his Mother in the same Prison wherein she had before Coupt him The like appears in several Persians Turks and Africans And for Fratricides which it causeth Bodin Lib. 6. cap. 5.735 736. saith Foolishly therefore do those Parents who overcomed with the flattery of their younger Sons and disinheriting the elder of their Kingdom have incensed their Children most cruelly to Murder one another so as did the Father of Atreus and Thyestes who willing to prefer the younger before the elder as more sit to manage Affairs of State so silled and foyled his House with many Tragedies And not to seek farther from home we have seen all this Realm on sire with Civil Wars for that Lewis the Devout at the intreaty of his second Wife had preferred Charles the Bald before Lothayr his elder Brother wherefore Pope Pius the Second did wisely in Rejecting the Request of Charles the 7th the French King desirous to have preferred Charles his younger Son before Lewis the Eleventh his elder Brother howbeit that the King had Reason so to do considering that Lewis had without any just occasion twice taken Arms against him so to have taken from him the Crown and to have taken the Scepter out of his hand And as Bodin saith of France he need not look far from home so may we say of England we need not look far from home for the said Events of disinheriting Primogeniture For what caused all those cruel Wars between the House of York and Lancaster from Generation to Generation whereby the English lost both all their Conquests and Hereditary Possessions in France and so many Princes of the Blood and Nobles and Commons were slain but that the Line of a younger Brother contended to be preferred before the Line of an elder And have not as bad Effects happen'd when the Successions of Kingdoms have been joyn'd or divided to more Sons or Heirs than one Division of Kingdoms or part of them or of the Treasure from the eldest to younger Sons destructive to Kingdoms The Father of Jugurtha made him and his two Brothers Associates but he killed his two Brothers and took all himself Constantine divided the Empire to his three Sons they destroyed each other till one had all James King of Aragon appointed Peter his eldest Son to be King of Aragon and James his younger Son to be King of Majorca yet afterwards the elder Brother took the younger Prisoner and in Prison starved him So it befell also the Children of Botislaus the Second King of Polonia who having divided the Kingdom unto his four Sons and having left nothing unto his fifth kindled such a fire of Sedition as could not be after quench't without much Blood of his Subjects So William the Conqueror left the Dutchy of Normandy to Robert his eldest and England to William Rufus and his youngest Son Henry a Pension Robert after the Death of Rufus raising a War to recover his Right of Primogeniture in England from his younger Brother lost the Battel was taken Prisoner by Henry and deprived of his Sight cast into Prison and there died miserably It had been safe therefore for the Preservation of his House and Kingdom to have left the Dominions intirely to the eldest and to have left not one only but both his younger Sons Pensions A multitude of other Examples there are of the ill success where Primogeniture is deprived not only of the whole but of any considerable-part or member of the Inheritance either in Land or Treasure which appears in the forementioned example of the Treasure and fenced Cities given to the younger Sons of Jehosophat therefore destroyed by the eldest Primogeniture not to have the same Prerogative in Private Families as in Kingdoms 2 Chro. 21.2 3 4. Which is to be intended only of Succession to Kingdoms And as to private Families both Equity and Policy is clean contrary and that there ought not to be left above a Scripture double Portion to the eldest where there are more than one which is agreeable with the Examples of most Nations Certificates introduce forein Laws and destroy the Laws of the Land 21. The Certificate Introduces foreign Laws and destroys Magna Charta and the Petition of Right The Foreign Laws it introduces on the Subjects as to Marriage Filiation and Succession and Religion and Liberty and Propriety all thereon depending have been already mentioned are the Imperial and French and of the Council of Trent That by the Ceremony of a Priest in a Temple the Adulterous Children of the Wife shall disinherit the Natural Children of the Husband The Trent Law That all Marriages without that Ceremony shall be Null and void and the Children Illegitimate The French Foppery That Natural Children shall not be Natural Children Excommunication Penance Absolution Commutation-Money twice punishing for one Offence and many other Popish foreign Laws all which destroy Magna Charta and the Petition of Right and are inconsistent with the Protestant Religion Liberty and Propriety Praemunire incurred by Certificates 22. That the Certificate Episcopal Introducing such foreign Laws incurr a Praemunire is proved before in the Case of Cardinal Woolsey Lib. 1. cap. 5.37 38. High Treason incurred by Certificates 23. The Certificate if it imposes those Foreign Imperial Papal French or Trent Laws of Marriage or Filiation on the Succession of the Crown or Certifie the King's eldest Son not to be Heir contrary to this Statute of 25 E. 3. incurrs the Penalty of High Treason Certificates not to be traversed or diputed nor under Appeal 24. The Certificate though utterly false and unjust is neither Traversable nor admits Probation to the Contrary nor is under Appeal either of Fact or Law nor is he bound to give any Reason of it But Sie volo sic Jubeo stat pro Ratione voluntas Of which see more at large Lib. 2. p. 175 176 177 178 179. 25. The Certificate causeth
First Because the Exiling or Disinheriting the King's eldest Son indangers the King himself Secondly Because to compass the Exile compasseth the Death of the eldest Son by depriving him of the King's Protection and exposing him to Poison or Assassination of his Enemies and to compass to Disinherit him is a manifest design to destroy him without which his Inheritance cannot be taken from him as Matth. 21.38 They said amongst themselves this is the Heir come let us kill him and let us seize on his inheritance And they caught him and cast him out of the Vinyard and slew him Object 8 Obj. 8. The Son of a King born after he is King is to be prefer'd in Succession before the Son of a King born while he is Prince And of this there are many Examples as Henry the First being the youngest Son of William the Conqueror Born when a Prince and born when a King standing in Competition for the Crown of England against Robert Duke of Normandy his elder Brother made this one of his Objections That Robert was born when his Father was but a Duke but Henry was born when his Father was a King and therefore obtained the Kingdom against Robert his eldest Brother And it is recited by Grot. de Jur. Bel. Pac. p. 171. That the like passed in Persia between Cyrus and Arsica in Judea between Antipater the Son of Herod the Great and his Brother in Hungary when Geissa obtained the Kingdom in Germany between Otto the First and Henry though not without Arms and likewise the same Question was between Xerxes and his Brother Atabarzanes and between Artaxerxes Mnemon and Cyrus the Sons of Darius and Parisatis Artaxerxes being the elder but born during the Private fortune of Darius and the like happened between Bajazet and Zemez contending for the Turkish Empire and many others Answ These were put to the Tryal of Battel and for the greatest part the eldest Son had the Success but if it had been otherwise the Event of War is no Rule of Justice and if it had been without War yet where there is a standing Act of Parliament Judicandum est Legibus non Examplis And this Act of Parliament was made to prevent the present and all other Accidents which might happen to disturb the Peace of Succession of the Kingdom and raise Civil Wars which it could not do without all other Sons and Heirs to the eldest Son and there being no other Son mentioned in the Letter of the Statute but the eldest and not a word of Distinction whether born before or after the Father's obtaining the Kingdom Vbi lex non distinguit ibi nec nos distinguere debemus for then the same mischiefs would insue beforementioned of extending a Statute of Treason by Equity which leaves Treason arbitrary to every Judge who will assume to declare it beyond the Letter and to insert as many kinds of Sons and Heirs as he pleased which would make the Law and all the Care and Wisdom of it in ascertaining the Son Heir to be of no Effect and leave the Kingdom in a dangerous Condition that every Prince Married in his Father's life-time and having then some Children and after his Father's Death others might occasion a Civil War who should succeed to the Crown when he died Object 9 Obj. 9. The next Objection That the King 's eldest Son is not yet Declared Prince of Wales or Prince of the Scots The Original of this Title used to be given to the eldest Sons of the Kings of England was from Henry the Third who gave his eldest Son Edward who was afterward King Edward the First on his Marriage to Elianor the Daughter of Spain amongst other Principalities in France England and Ireland likewise that of Wales Hinc natum ut deinceps unusquisque Rex qui secutus est filium majorem natu principem Walliae facere consuevit And in continuance of this Custom Anno 1610. Prince Henry the eldest Son of King James was solemnly created Prince of Wales by his Father As to the Title designing the Prince of Scotland to be next Successor or Heir apparent it seems to have been by their Investiture of Cumberland for saith Buchanan Rer. Scot. lib. 6. p. 175. That Constantine the Third in the Tenth year of his Reign Milcolumbo proximo Regis filio Cumbriam donavit qui honos velut Augurium Argumentum erat eum proxime regnaturum Ac deinceps in proximis aliquot Regibus id fuisse observaturum manifesta adversus veterem Comitiorum rationem fraude quae omnem Liberorum susfragiorum vim prope tollerit non minus quà m Cossâ—à Caesaribus Designatio Constantine the Third in the Tenth year of his Reign gave Cumberland to Malcoliâ— the Son of the last King which Honour was as it were the Inauguration or Sign of him who was next to succeed in the Kingdom and was after observed by some of the next Kings to that end to take away by Fraud the free Election by Parliament no less than did the Designations of the Consuls by the Caesars and after p. 189. he sath That Kenneth the Third being King by Election of the People to make the Kingdom Hereditary to his own Son Malcolm finding it an Impediment in his way that his Brother Duffus his Son Malcolm Cumbriae tum praefectus erat quam Regionem Scoti beneficio Regum Anglorum it a tenebant ut Cumbriae Praefectura velut omen Regni esset atque ita jam per aliquot aetates observatum erat was then Governor of Cumberland which Region the Scots held by Gift from the Kings of England to that intent that the Presidentship of Cumberland should be for a Sign who should be next Successor to the Kingdom and so for divers Ages the same hath accordingly been observed he to inherit his own Poisoned his Brother's Son and p. 190. he saith Milcolumbus regis filius in natura adhuc ad rerum administrationem aetate Cumbriae praefectus et princeps Scotorum est Declaratus quod nomen perinde est Scotis atque apud Gallos Delfinus apud priores Romanorum Imperatores Caesar apud posterio res Rex Romanorum quibus omnibus Successor superiori Magistratui dari intelligitur Malcolm the King's Son in an unripe Age for Publick Affairs is declared President of Cumberland and Prince of the Scots which Name is with the Scots Equipollent to the Daulphin amongst the French to Caesar amongst the Ancient Romans and amongst the Modern to the King of the Romans by all which Titles the Successor to the Superiour Magistracy is understood but notwithstanding for the most part this hath been the Custom yet it hath been likewise often omitted and Admit it had not yet there being no Law requiring it there is no pretence that such Omissions makes any incapacity in the Heir to succeed at Common Law or to be within this Statute for the Statute making no Distinction between the King 's eldest Son when
both in England and Scotland sought to dishonour him with the Name of Nothus for by that name Buchanun Rerum Scot. 175. Stiles him and says Praerat omnibus Anglorum copiis Athelstanus Edwardi Nothus And in the same manner other Writers yet was neither the name nor the thing any bar of his Succession to the Kingdom but he was thereto prefer'd before his younger Brother Edmund whom Papal Laws made Legitimate and accordingly he was Crowned by Athelmus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury at Kingston upon Thames And proved after the most Heroick Victorious Prince that the English ever had before the Conquest for he conquered both the Danes and Scots confederated against him and Subdued the whole Island Edward the Son of Edgar Legitimate per Jus Coronae Ethestede for her excellent Beauty sirnamed the White was a Virgin and not Prohibited by Law of God for King Edgar to Marry but he neglected or despised Pontifical Ceremonies and begot on her without them his eldest Son Edward for which Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury injoyned him seven years Pennance which he underwent for the Fact After Edgar Married Elfrida the only Daughter and Heiress of Ordganus Duke of Devonshire with the Ceremonies of the Church and made her his Queen and likewise Contracted with her That her Children should be Heirs to the Crown and had Issue by her two Sons Edmund who died young and Ethelred who survived him Edgar dies Note here are all the Objections made against the succeeding to the Crown by Edward which are now made and more for here is an Heir by Marriage-Covenant opposed against the Natural Heir Queen Elfrid excepted against the Succession of Edward the eldest Son That his Mother was no Queen nor Wife Married according to the Ceremonies of the Church and that he was therefore Illegitimate That she her self was King Edgar's Queen and Wife whom he Married Solemnly according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church and that by his Marriage-Covenants he bound himself That her Children by him should be Successors to the Kingdom That therefore her Son was both the Legitimate Heir and Heir by Covenant and thereupon drew divers Lords to be of her Party and the two Sons are both produced before the Council assembled to demand their Rights But while the Council sate to Debate the same Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury came in with his Banner and Cross and not staying for dispute of the Title presented Prince Edward the eldest Son as next right Heir to the Crown and their lawful King and the Assembly consisting most of Clergy-Men drew the Approbation of the Rest whereupon Prince Edward was Admitted and Crowned King being but Twelve years old by Archbishop Dunstan at Kingston upon Thames Anno Dom. 975. and so continued till about Three years and Six Months after King Edward Hunting in the Isle of Purbeck not far from Corf Castle where his Mother-in-Law Queen Elfrid with his Brother Ethelred were then Residing he out of his Love to both would needs go to visit them where the cruel Step-mother out of Ambition to make her own Son King caused one to Stab him in the Back with a Knife as he was Drinking a cup of Wine on Horseback at his departing who feeling himself hurt set Spurs to his Horse thinking thereby to get to his Company but the wound being Mortal and he fainting through loss of so much Blood fell from his Horse and one foot being intangled in his Stirrup he was thereby ruefully dragged up and down and lastly left Dead at Corf Gate in Commiseration of which untimely Death he was ever afterward called Edward the Martyr On which may be noted 1. That notwithstanding the Mother of Edward was no Queen Notwithstanding she was never Contracted nor Married by the Rites and Ceremonies of the then Church Notwithstanding Elfrid was a Queen and solemnly Married by all those Rites and Ceremonies notwithstanding the Kingdom was by Marriage-Covenant setled on her Issue by King Edgar Notwithstanding Ethelred appeared with a Company of Lords Competitors Notwithstanding the accompanying of Edgar with Elfred was through Romish Superstition thought so unlawful as not to be Expiated under seven years Pennance Yet the same Archbishop Dunstan who imposed the same on the Father laid none on the Son but he and the Clergy declared him the Right and Lawful Heir by which they did implicitly confess and acknowledge That the Moral Law of God of Marriage and not any Ceremonial Law of Man is the immutable Law which ought to Govern the Succession of the Crown 2. The opinion of the Possession of the Crown to purge all Treason from him who commits it hath been a great incouragement to the committing of the same 3. That Princes disinheriting the Children of the first Wives and entailing their Kingdoms to the Children of the Second destroying thereby their own Houses 4. That none are more Cruel to the Children of the first Mothers than Step-mothers which it seems makes all Poets so out of Charity with them that they never mention them without some odious Epithet of Injustae mala dirae ferae terribiles Novercae and defame them with Stabbing Poisoning and Witchcraft Pocula si quando Saevae infecere Novercae Miscueruntque herbas non innoxia verba Virg. Georg. 2. When Cruel Step-mothers Poys'ning the Cup Add Herbs and Spells for Right Heirs to drink up I find but one kind of Step-mother excepted by Horace as not apt to be Guilty of these Practices which is she that neither brings Portion nor expects Jointure particularly of the Getick Women of whose Chastity and good Nature he thus writes Illic matre carentibus Privignis mulier temperat innocens Nec dotata regit virum Conjux nec infido fidit adultero Dos est magna parentium Virtus metuens alterius viri Certo foedere castitas Et peccare nefas aut pretium mori The innocent and kind Step-mothers there The Orphans Motherless to hurt forbear And not with Portions o're their Husbands rant Helpt by the Gay adulterous Gallant Vertue is Portion great and Chastity Strange man to touch more fearing than to Die 5. That where Marriage by the Ceremonial Laws of Men is preferr'd before a Marriage by the Moral Law of God this makes way for all Murders by Step-mothers of the Children of first Mothers of which see likewise the Example of Roxalana before related at large Lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 245. William the Conqueror succeeded to his Natural Fathers Dukedom his Mother never Married by a Priest in a Temple William the Conqueror was the Son of Rollo Duke of Normandy by Arlotte a mean Woman whom he made Sa Compaigne or Sociam Thalami without any Ceremonies of a Priest or Temple she was a Person how mean soever yet not Prohibited by the Law of God for him to Marry and though some slander her in hatred to her Son as if by some Lightness of hers all such as were of that Trade
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
of his dead Father but his Oath to his Loving Subjects which was his Ruine for his entertainment of French Councels endammaged his English Subjects and his nearest French Relation Isabel his own Queen Persidiously by the help of her Brother the French King raised a Rebellion here of his own Subjects against him which caused him to be Deposed from his Kingdom and shortly after to be Murdered in an hideous manner in Barckly Castle So here are four Kings Great Grandfathor Grandfather Father and Son all Papists all Confirming and Breaking Magna Charta and their Oaths and their Subjects to whom they have broken them have been all Papists Magna Charta no less than Thirty times Sworn or confirmed and forsworn or broken by Papist Kings to Papist Subjects and the same Papist Religion gives no Mutual obligation of an Oath though to Men of the same Religion Yea this Magna Charta of Liberties hath been Thirty times Confirmed by King and Parliament while the Papist Religion lasted which shews the Oath hath been more than Thirty times broken by some or other of their Papist Princes for otherwise it would not need so many new Confirmations and Oaths In the Protestant Religion it is held That once forsworn ever-forlorn In the Papist it appears he is not so thought though Thirty times forsworn but he may still swear and forswear and begin again anew as many times as he will were it not therefore more secure for the Papist himself to Covenant with a Protestant Successor who dares not break his Oath lying under so great a Penalty of Conscience than with a Papist who makes Perjury not to be Penal and whose Religion it self teaches the wicked Doctrine of Lysander that Children ought to be deceived with Promises and Men with Oaths for what Commerce or Humane Society can there be had with those who will keep neither whether they be Kings or Subjects or of what Degree or Religion soever they be 2. Seeing a Papist Successor can be obliged by no Contract or Oath Only two ways of Succession Contract or Conquest therefore he cannot Succeed by Contract And if he Succeed not by Contract then he will Succeed by Conquest for there are but two ways of Succession either by Contract or by Conquest And if he Succeed therefore by Conquest such Power he will say 't is Diis aequa Potestas Deus est Imperator in Coelis and Imperator est Deus in Terris Jure Divino is above all Humane Laws he will therefore be Lawless and no Law shall be but his Will But a Protestant Successor claims only to the Rule according to Laws agreed and assented to by the Subjects themselves by their Representative in Parliament Can any Sober Papist deny it is not better to have his equal Laws than as a Slave to be destroyed at Pleasure by a cruel unjust and lawless Will as they are generally by their Princes in all Catholick Countries Further Examples of the Perfidiousness of Papist Princes to Papist Subjects Henry the Fourth a Papist King forswore himself to papist Subjects HEnry the Fourth was a Papist and a Violent Enemy against the Wicklenite Protestants yet perfidious to his own Papists too as appears Truss Hist fo 73. there are Articles made against him and the first of them is That when he return'd from his Exilement he made Faith only to Challenge and Recover his Inheritance and his Wives and not to intermeddle with the King nor with his Crown by reason of which Oath divers Loyal and good Subjects to King Richard resorted unto him not having any Treasonable intent but after when he saw his Powers so much increased that he might do what he pleased he wickedly brake his Oath and without any Right or colour like Right procured himself to be made and Crowned King Another Article was That no Justice could be expected from his hand because that contrary to the Oath he had taken when he was Crowned he had by Letters sent into sundry Shires thereby procured certain Burgesses of the Parliament Knights of the Shire to be Chosen whom he knew would not fail to serve his turn as occasion should be offered Here we see is a Papist King and Papist Subjects and he takes an Oath to them concerning the greatest Liberty the Subjects can enjoy which is the free Election of their Representative in Parliament yet this Papist King breaks this very Oath not only to his Papist Subjects but to that very party who were of his own party and Crowned him Richard Duke of York a papist Subject forswore himself to Henry the Sixth a papist King Henry the Sixth and Richard Duke of York were both Papists and the Duke of York took his Oath of Allegiance to King Henry After taking King Henry Prisoner He Calleth a Parliament in the King's Name by which Parliament terrified by the Duke's Sword it was agreed and Enacted That Henry during his Life should retain the Name and Honour of a King and that the Duke of York should be proclaimed Heir Apparent to the Crown and Protector to the King's Person his Land Dominions and Countrey And that if at any time King Henry's Friends Allies Favourites in his behalf should attempt the Disanulling this Act that then the Duke should have present possession of the Crown No sooner was the Parliament Dissolved but the Duke by vertue of his Protectorship esteeming himself a King in Office and Power though not in Name dispatcheth Letters to the Queen the Duke of Somerset Exceter and other Nobility who were then in Scotland with all speed to repair to his presence at London they knowing their own Security lay only in keeping out of his Power marched towards him but Guarded with an Army of Eighteen thousand Men and met him at Wakefield who had there but a small Army of Five thousand to oppose them on whose Valour notwithstanding the Duke relying and though advised by his Council to forbear Fight till his Son the Earl of March could bring up his Forces to joyn with him yet the Pride of his former Victoriâ—s make him deaf to good Advice and therefore rashly joyned 〈◊〉 whereby he hasten'd his own Destiny and was Slain on the place with Three thousand of his Men after which Overthrow of the Father his Son the Earl of March and his Confederates having overthrown the Queens Army at the Battel of Mortimor's Cross and fought the Battel of St. Albans and the Earl of Warwick's Forces joyned with him is proclaimed King but before he could be Crowned he was forced to Fight again with another Army which King Henry had raised in the North which Battel continued doubtful with eager Resolution on both Sides the space of Ten hours whereby there were above Six and thirty thousand Men Slain Bak. Hist 203. But in the end the Day fell to Edward and the King flying to Barwick and her Son to France Edward is Crowned King but after Disobliging