Norman Succession.

FRom what hath been said, the Pretences and Causes of William, Duke of Normandy, his succeeding Edward the Confessor, and en­joying the Crown of England, are very evident; as also, are the same to his Dukedom. Gul. Gemet. lib. 5. c. 12. He was the only Son of his Father Robert; who going on Pilgrimage to Jerusalem, called together the Noble-men of his Dukedom, and brought his Son William, though Illegitimate, be­fore them, and earnestly exacted of them, that in his stead they would chuse him their Lord: who, though but a Child, they forthwith, ac­cording to the Decree of the Duke, acknowledged him for their Prince and Lord, swearing Fealty unto him. Ibid. Robertum ergo Archiepisco­pum cum optimatibus suis Duc atus accersivit, & illis velle se appetere Jero­solimitanam pergrinationem manifestavit, exponens autem eis Willielmus filium suum, quem unicum apud Falesiam genuerat ab iis attentissime exige­bat, ut hinc sibi loco sui dum eligerent, Qui licet sub tenerrima detineretur oetati puerili juxta Decretum Ducis protinus cum prompta viracitate col­laudavere principem & Dominum, pangentes ti fidelitatem non violandis Sa­cramentis. And R. Hoveden affirms it to have been the custom in Nor­way (from whence the Normans came) for Bastards to inherit, and that in his time it was so. R. Hoveden. f. 425. a.n.20. Consuetudo Regni Norweiae est usque in hodier­num diem, quod is qui alicujus Regis Norweiae dignoscitur esse filius, licet sit spurius & de ancilla genitus, tantum sibi jus vendicat in Regnum genti­tus & ideo fiunt inter eos proelia indesinenter, donec unus eorum vincatur, & interficiatur. And so it happened between the Curators of Duke William in his Nonage, and the Pretenders as Heirs to his Grandfather of the Dutchy of Normandy.

The same Right of Succession, as Testamentary Heir to his Father, William Rufus had to the Crown of England. Fragment. de Gul. Con­questore, f. 32. n. 30. Ord. vit. f. 659. C.D. Metuens Rex ne in Regno tam diffuso repentina oriretur turbatio, epistolam de constituendo Re­ge fecit Lanfranco Archiepiscopo suoque sigillo signatam tradidit Gulielmo Rufo silio suo, jubens ut in Angliam transfretaret continuo.

This was done a little before the Conqueror's Ibid. n. 20, 40. Ord. vit. ut supra. Death: and he did it for that his Son William always stuck close to him, and had in every thing, according to the utmost of his power, been dutiful and obe­dient.

Ibid. f. 663. B. Rufus brought his Father's Epistle, by which he had constituted him King of England, to Lanfranc Arch-Bishop of Canterbury: who, having read it, hasted with him to London, and consecrated him King in the old Church of St. Peter at Westminster on the Flor. Wigor. f. 642. 26th. of Sep­tember, his Father dying the 9th. of the same Month, Degest. Reg. f. 67. n. 20. Pa­ris, f. 14. n. 10. Willielmus Willielmi filius, saith Malmsbury, a patre ultima valetudine decumbente in Successorem adoptatus est, accessit & favori ejus maximum rerum momen­tum, Archiepiscopus Lansrancus, eo quod eum nutrierat & militem fecerat: quo Authore annitente, Die Sanctorum Cosinae & Damianae Coronatus est. That is, William the Son of Willaim was by his Father, in his last Sick­ness, adopted his Successor: but it was matter of great moment, and [Page 11] the greatest Addition to his Success, that Arch-Bishop Lanfranc had educated him, and made him a It was then the custom for Bishops to make Knights Septemb. 27. F. 642. 1088. Knight; by whose Authority and Endeavour he was Crowned on the day of Cesina and Damianus.

Florence of Worcester, who only says that he was consecrated King at Westminster by Arch-Bishop Laufranc, hath noted, that not long at­ter his Coronation there arose great Discord and Contention between the chief Men of England: for part of the Great and Noble Normans fa­voured King William, but it was the least; and the other part of them fa­voured Robert Duke of Normandy, which was the greatest. Odo, who Malms ut sup. lin. 49. mortally hated Lanfranc, headed the Duke's Party, and Lanfranc head­ed the King's; who, with the King, Flor. Wigor. ut supra. Congregatio quantum ad pre­sens poterat Normanorum, sed tamen maxime Anglorum, equestri & pe­destri (licet mediocri) exercitu, &c. Having raised such an Army as he could of Horse and Foot of Normans, These English were Stipcndi­ary Soldiers, Paris, f. 15. n. 10. but the grratest part English; (though but a mean one) and by using the common Bait of Liberty, declaring he would relax the rigid Laws, give free leave of Hunting, &c. Also by insinuating into Roger Earl of Arundel and Shrewsbury, the chief Person for the Duke, next unto Odo Bishop of Baieux and Earl of Kent, brought him off to his Party. By these means he brake the Force of his Enemies, and ever after ruled by an Army. More of this story may be seen in Eadmer. Ord. Vit. f. 666. &c. Florence of Worcester, and Malmsbury, in the places before cited, who all lived at the time.

Here we see Rufus claimed as Testamentary Heir, and by reason of that Claim was advanced to the Throne, by the Assistance of Lanfranc's and the Bishops Faction, who then swayed the People, and ruled by the help of an Army ever after. Whoever rightly considers this story, cannot call it an Election.

After the death of Rufus, Fol. 650. lin. 9. F. W. died 19 Hen. 1. Florence of Worcester only says, that Hen­ry, his third Brother succeeded him; and that the day he was crowned by Maurice Bishop of London, he gave great Liberties to the Church and Kingdom; and commanded that King Edward's Laws should be obser­ved, with such Amendments as his Father had amended them. And fur­ther says Ibid. lin. 27. that very many great Men sent for Duke Robert over, and promised him the Crown and Kingdom: and coming, they did some of them adhere to him, and Ibid. lin. 41. others, dissembling their Kindness and Affection, stayed with King William until they had an opportunity of shewing it. But the Bishops, the Common Soldiers and English (stuck close to King Henry; by whose means he raised a very great Army, and were ready to fight for him; when they came to an Agreement by the Mediation of the wise Men of both Parties.

Eadmer tells us that most of the great Men either did, Fol. 59. n. 10, 20, 30. or were rea­dy to revolt from King Henry; but Anselm Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, who had given him great Assistance in raising his Army, upon great Promises made, that all the Church-Affairs should be left to his directi­on and disposing, and that he would for ever after obey the Decrees and Commands of the Pope, Eadmer was Anselm's Chap­lain at this time. procured the great Men to assemble; and then so wheedled and cajoled them and their Army, that he altered theit Intentions: And it was from his Fidelity and Industry that Henry lost not the Kingdom.

[Page 12] This King Henry was a plain right down Usurper, he had no pre­tence of Donation, no Testamentary Right from his Father; and there­fore, as Fol. 88. a. n. 20, 40. Malmsbury shews us more particularly, he was advanced by a Faction; there being only five great Men, Robert Fitz-Haymon, Ri­chard de Redvers, Roger Bigot, Henry Earl of Warwick, and Robert Earl of Mellent, his Brother; all Normans that favoured him: and by the contrivance of Henry Earl of Warwick he was elected King. All others sent privately to Duke Robert to come and be their King, or openly reproached Henry. This was an excellent Election made by a Faction and an Army, and perhaps with a bawling multitude after them; and indeed, there could be no other Election than such an one as this, Flor. Wigorn. f. 649. l. 27. for Rufus was slain in New Forest on the 2d. of August, being Thursday; and Henry was Crowned on the 5th. of August, being Sun­day: So that it was impossible for all that were or ought to be concern­ed in such an Election, all the Kingdom over to have notice, meet and dispatch that Business in two days time.

These Historians lived at the very time these things were done. It is true he says in his own Charter, Paris, Anno Dom.1100.fol. 55. lin. 42. That he was Crowned King by the Common Council of the Barons of England. Sciatis me misericor­dia Dei, & Communi Concilio Baronum Regni Angliae ejusdem Regni Re­gem Coronatum esse. And he must say this, or nothing; for no other Pretence or Title he could have; and there never was any other U­surper in his Circumstances, but must say so, or some other thing, to make out a Title. King Stephen, in his Charter of Liberties, says, He was elected, A Clero & Populo. King John, in his Charter of Fees of the Seal, affirmed himself right Heir to the Crown, when Arthur Duke of Britain, and his Sister Eleanor, Son and Daughter to his El­der Brother Jeffrey, were then living: and they were both vain Affir­mations, as will appear in their several stories.

Some later Historians than these, Patis died, An. Do. 1259. Brompton, 1326. Westminister, 1377. Knighton, 1380. as C. 8. Col. 2374. Matthew Paris, who wrote above an hundred Years after them. Mat. Westminster, and Hen. de Knighton, and Brompton, who wrote at least two hundred and fifty Years after them; all say he was elected: But only Knighton, amongst them all, tells us the most considerable reason why Robert, his elder Brother, was rejected, C. 8. Col. 2374. Robertus, says he, semper contrarius & a­deo innaturalis extiterat Baronibus Regni Angliae, quod plenario consensu & consilio totius Communitatis Regni IMPOSUERUNT EI ILLEGITI­MITATEM, QUOD NON FUERAT PROCREATUS DE LEGITI­MO THORO WILLIELMI CONQUESTORIS, UNDE UNANI­MI assensu suo ipsum refutaverunt, & pro rege omnino recusaverunt & Hen. frem. in Regem erexerunt. Robert was always averse, and so harsh to the Barons of England, that they, by full Consent and Advice, voted him Illegitimate, because he was not begotten lawfully by William the Con­queror; and for that reason, by unanimous Assent, they refused him, and set up Henry his Brother to be their King. From this Passage of Knighton, we see the Community, or Baronage of all England fixed the Right of Succession in the Legitimate Right of Blood; and therefore this King, his two elder Brothers being dead without Issue, desired to secure the Succession unto his Lawful Issue by Right of Blood. To that end, Malms. fol. 93. a. lin. 36. all Freemen of England and Normandy, of what Order [Page 13] and Dignity soever, and of whatsoever Lord they held, or were Fendata­ries to, were forced to do Homage and swear Fealty to his Son William, then but twelve Years old.

And in the Ibid. fol. 99. a. n. 40. twenty seventh of his Reign, he caused all the great Men of England (after the death of his Sons, William and Richard) to recognize Maud the Empress, his Daughter, Queen; to whom the Ibid. only Lawful Succession was due from her Grandfather, Uncle and Father that were Kings; and from her Mother many Generations.

In the thirty first of King Henry, Malms. s. 100. a. n. 40. he and his Daughter coming into England, at a great Meeting of the Nobility, or Parliament, at Northampton, those which before had sworn Fealty renewed their Oaths to her; and those which had not done it before, then did it.

Paris tells us that the Clergy, and Great or Noble Men made Con­ditions with Henry; who promised them what is before related: and in that gave them satisfaction. But as all Usurpers ever did, so he changed his Mind; and his Canting Speech had no other effects than to enslave them: Paris, f. 61. n. 50, f. 62. n. 10, 20.] for with a seared and cahterized Conscience he had obtain­ed the Kingdom, and usurped upon his Brother Robert, who had mani­fest Right; Iid. 61. lib. ult. 62, lin. 1. &c. ibid. lin. 23. impudently violating the Laws, and Promises by which he had drawn in all Men to serve him: and afterward, taking him Prisoner, caused his Eyes to be Ibid. 6.. n. 10. pulled out, and kept him in Prison Ibid. f. 73. n. 20. twenty four Years, until he died.

Malms. Hist. North. f. 100. b. n. 30. King Henry having thus provided for the Security of his Daughter Maud, being asked in his Sickness by Robert Duke of Gloucester, and the Noble Men that then were with him, about a Successor. Filiae Vid. hic. f. 105. b. n. 40. omne Reguum Augl. simul & Ducatum Nor­maniae. omnem terram suam citra & ultra mate, Legitima & perenni succes­sione adjucavit: Adjudged his Daughter his Lawful Successor in all his Territories.

Pitsius in that Year, Col. 505. n. 40, 50. Radulphus de Diceto, Dean of Saint Paul's, who died, Anno Dom. 1210. says, that Hath Bigot, Steward of the King's Houshold made speed out of Normandy (where the King died) into England, and made Oath before the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, that King Henry upon his Death-bed, upon some differences which happened between him and his Daughter the Empress, did dis-inherit her, and made Stephen Earl of Bo­loign his Heir. Whereupon William Arch-Bishop of Canterbury giving too much credit to the words of the Steward, consecratcd Stephen Earl of Mortaigne King at Westminster. If this story be true, he was Testa­mentary Heir, and had a Testamentary Right; and in that Right he was made King: But be this story true or false, his Advancement to the Throne was as followeth. Notwithstanding, all the Nobility, and amongst them, King Stephen himself, had sworn Fealty to Maud the Em­press; yet by the Interest. of his Brother Malms. n. 10. Henry Bishop of Winchester, and the Pope's Legat (without which he could have done nothing) he was made King: he brought off Roger Bishop of Salisbury, a great and powerful Prelate; also William de Pout-Arch, Keeper of King Henry's Treasure, which was Ibid. n. 40, 50. 100000 l. in Money. And by his own Dex­terity, the Artifice of his Brother, and Roger Bishop of Salisbury, and the advantage of this Money, he inclined the minds of the Noble Men much towards him, and to secure himself raised an Army mostly of Flemings and Britains. At his Ibid. n. 20. Coronation were only three Bishops, [Page 14] the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of Winchester and Salisbury, no Abbots, and few Noble-men.

I think this looks not like an Election; Ibid. 101. b. n. 10. yet he in his Charter of Li­berties, which he chiefly granted to the Church, says, he was elected by the Assent of the Clergy and Laity, and confirmed by the Pope.

Afterwards, Stephen using the Bishops roughly, lost his Brother Henry's favour; who, by his Legantine Power, Ibid. 105. b. n. 20, 30, 40. Malmsbury, says he was present in this Council. Ibid. lin. 26. called a Council of the Clergy at Winchester, to consult of the Peace of the Kingdom: Where they conclude, that the Right of chusing and ordaining Kings chiefly belonged to them. And therefore, having first called upon God, they chose Maud the Empress Queen, Ibid. f. 106. a. lin. 1,2,3. Ad Cleri ius potissimum spectat principem eligere & ordinare, invocata itaque in auxilium Divini­tate, filiam Regis, in Angliae Normanni aeque Dominam eligimus, &c.

But not long after, Ibid. f. 107. n.10,20,30,40 being displeased with Maud, he entred into a Confederacy against her; and, Ibid. f. 108.a. n. 30, 40, 50. as Legat, called another Council at Westminister, in which was read the Pope's Bull in favour of Stephen; who was then advanced to the Throne again. And the Kingdom being wasted and destroyed with continual Wars, Gervas Do­rob. Col. 1375. n. 10. Paris, f. 86. n. 10. Hoveden, f. 281. a. lin. 21. the Arch-Bishop, this Legat and the Bishops mediate a Peace between Stephen and Henry Duke of Anjou, Son to the Empress: by which it was agreed, that Stephen should adopt Henry his Son, who, after his death, should en­joy the Crown, and Stephen quietly to wear it during his Life, &c.

Which Agreement is most fully and clearly related by Matthew of Westminister: Fol. 246. n. 10. An.Dom. 1153. This Accord was made at Wallingford, by the diligence, of Arch-Bishop Theobald and Bishops of the Kingdom. Rex Stephanus omni horede viduatus praeter solum­modo Ducem Henricum, recognovit in Conventu Episcoporum & aliorum de Regno optimatum, quod Dux Henricus; jus haereditarium in Regnum Angliae: habebat, & Dux benigne concessit, ut Rex Stephanus tota vita sua suum Regnum pacifice possideret. Ita tamen confirmatum est, quod ipse Rex & Episcopi tunc praesentes cum caeteris Regni optimatibus jurarent, quod Dux Henricus post mortem Regis, si illum superviverct Regnum sine aliqua contradictione obtineret: that is, King Stephen not having an Heir, except only Duke Henry, did acknowledge in an Assembly of the Bishops and other Chief Men of the Kingdom, That Duke Henry had the Hereditary Right to the Kingdom of England; and the Duke kindly granted that King Stephen should, during his life, peaceably enjoy his Kingdom. The Agreement was so confirmed, that the King himself, and the Bishops then present, with the rest of the best Men of the King­dom sware, that Duke Henry, after the death of the King, if he should out-live him, should enjoy the Kingdom without all contradiction.

This Accord afforded Quiet and Tranquillity both to Henry and the Nation, with certain Confidence of enjoying the Kingdom after the death of Stephen; which he did. But as to his Right and Title, it ad­ded nothing to that, it being Hereditary: for he was acknowledged the true Heir by his Adversary Stephen, in the presence of the Bishops, and the best Men of the Kingdom: who all likewise acknowledged it by owning the Accord, and swearing to observe it.

On the Ibid. n. 30. Anno. Dom. 1154. 24th. of October, the Year following, King Stephen died, and on the 19th. of December following, Henry was Crowned at West­minster by Theobald Arch-Bishop of Canterbury. And Maud the Em­press, [Page 15] being satisfied with the Enthroning of her Son, quitted her Pre­tensions.

King Henry the Second dying in France, July 7. 1189, Hoved. f. 372. b. 40,50, f.373. a. lin. 7. his eldest Son and Heir, Richard, was by Walter Arch-Bishop of Roven, girt with the Sword of the Dukedom of Normandy, on the 20th. of the same Month, in the presence of the Bishops, Earls and Barons of Normandy. And before his coming into England, Ibid. n.50 & b. lin. 7. Quod fidem por­tabit Regi An­gliae Richardo, Regis Hen. fi­lio, &c. every Free-man of the whole Kingdom, by the Command of his Mother Alienor, sware Fealty to Richard, King of England, Son of King Henry, as to their Liege Lord, against all Men.

Afterwards, Ibid. f. 374. a. n. 10. coming to London, Congregatis ibi Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Comitibus, Baronibus, & copiosa Militum multitudine in oc­cursum ejus, quorum Consilio & assensu ipse Dux 3. Nonas Septembris, Consecratus & Coronatus est apud Westmonasterium in Regem Angliae: a Baldwino Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo, &c. The Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Earls, Barons, and a copious multitude of Knights met him: by whose Advice and Assent, the Of Norman­dy. Duke was Crowned King of England by Baldwin Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, many other Bishops there named assisting. Et omnibus fere Abbatibus, & Prioribus, & Comitibus, & Baronibus Angliae astantibus. Almost all the Abbots, Priors, Earls and Barons of England being Spectators.

Ralph de Diceto, then Dean of St. Paul's, London, who, in the Va­cancy of that Church and Bishoprick, Rad. de Di­ceto, Col. 647. n. 40, 50. supplied the Office of the Bi­shop at King Richard's Coronation, hath this passage, Comes itaque Pi­ctavorum Richardus HAEREDITARIO JURE PRAEMOVENDUS in Ragem, post tam Cleri, quam Populi solemnem & debitam Electionem in­volutus est triplici Sacramento, &c. Therefore Richard, Earl of Poictou, being by Hereditary Right to be made King, after the solemn and due Election, as well of the Clergy as the Laity, sware to three things. Ibidem. Scilicet, Quod opem impendet pro viribus, ut Ecclesia Dei populusque Chri­stianus veram pacem obtinent, quod interdicet omnibus Rapacitatem, quod in judiciis equitatem praecipiet & misericordiam. That is to say, That he would use his utmost power, that the Church of God, and Christi­an People might enjoy true Peace: That he would interdict Rapine to all Men: That he would command Mercy and Equity to be done in Judgments.

What can this solemn and due Election signifie here? what can it mean further, than that Richard being King by Hereditary Right, was so owned and recognized by the Clergy and Laity?

John, in his Brother Richard's Life-time, Hoved. f.398. b. n.30,40,50, &c. 399. b. n. 40. An.Dom. 1191. had a mind to be King; and taking advantage or his Absence in the Holy Land, and his Impri­sonment in Germany, practised with the Nobility and Londoners to that purpose. The last sware faithful Service to their Lord, King Richard, and to his Heirs; and if he should die without Issue, Vt reciperent Co­mitem Johannem fratrem Richardi Regis in Regem & Dominum. That they would receive Earl John, the Brother of King Richard, for their King and Lord: and swore Fealty to him against all Men, saving their Fealty to his Brother King Richard.

Two Years afterward, Ibid. f.41 2.a.n. 40,50. Anno Dom. 1193. confederating with the King of France against his Brother, and being assisted by him, he returned into England, and [Page 16] brought many Strangers with him: and coming to London, demanded the Kingdom of the Arch-Bishop of Roven, who was then Justiciary, and the other Justiciaries of England, & Fidelitates Hominum Angliae; affirming the King of England, his Brother, was dead. But not believ­ing him, they and the other great Men of the Kingdom rejected him.

Then, Ibid. 6. lin. 1. &c. swelling with Fury, he fortified his Castles and places of Strength, and seized the Crown-Lands. Many came in unto him; but being deceived, they were punished according to their deserts.

And for these and other Ibid. f. 417. b. n. 30. Anno Dom. 1194. Treasons committed the Year following; as combining with the King of France, and offering great Sums of Mo­ney to the Emperor to keep King Richard in Prison, and making new Ibid. f. 418. a. n. 40. Disturbances in the Nation. Ibid. b. lin. 6. Per Commune Consilium Regni De­finitum est quod Comes Johannes dissaifiretur de omnibus Tenementis suis in Anglia. By the Common Council of the Kingdom it was decreed he should be disseized of all he held of the King in England. And present­ly all his Ibid. n. 20. Castles were besieged and taken from him.

Yet for all this, the next Year King Richard Ibid. f. 428. a. n. 20. Anno Dom. 1195. 6. Ric. pardoned his Bro­ther John, and restored to him the Earldom of Moreton, or Mortaigne, the Honour of Eye, and Earldom of Glocester, except the Castles; and for his other Earldoms and Lands, allowed him Yearly eight thousand Pounds of Anjou-Money.

And in the last Year of his Reign, Ibid. f. 449. b. lin. 37. Cum Rex de vita desperaret, divisit Johanni fratri suo Regnum Angliae, & omnes alias terras suas, & fecit fieri praedicto Johanni fidelitates ab illis qui aderant, & praecepit ut traderentur ei Castella sua & tres partes Thesauris sui. When the King despaired of Life, he devised to his Brother John the Kingdom of Eng­land, and all other his Lands, and made all present swear Fealty to him, and commanded that his Castles and three parts of his Treasure should be delivered to him.

Richard being dead, Fol. 450. b. n. 10. King Ri­chard died, Apr. 6. 1199. John stayed in Normandy (where, by Wal­ter Arch-Bishop of Roven, he was girt with the Sword of that Dutchy, April 25. on St. Mark's Day) and sent Hubert Arch-Bishop of Canter­bury, and the Pope's Legat, and William Marshal Earl of Strigvil, into England, to keep the Peace; together with Jeffrey Fitz-Peter, Justiti­ary of England, and other Barons of the Kingdom. Ibid. n. 40. Qui fecerunt homines regni tam de Civitatibus quem de Burgis, & Comites, & Barones, & libere tenentes jurare fidelitatem & pacem Johanni Normannorum Duci filii Henrici Regis, filii Matildis Imperatricis contra omnes homines. Who made the Homines Regni could be no other, seeing Fealty and Ho­mage was due only from such as held Lands subject to that Service. Homagers of England, as well of Cities as Burroughs, and Earls, Barons, and free Tenants, to swear Fealty and Peace to John Duke of Normandy, the Son of King Henry, the Son of Maud the Em­press, against all Men.

Ibid. n. 40. Notwithstanding this, all the Bishops, Earls and Barons which had Castles, Manned, Victualled and stored them with Arms. But Hubert the Arch-Bishops, William Marshal and Jeffrey Fitz-Peter, Justi­ciary of England. met at Northampton, and called before them those which they most doubted: David, Brother to the King of Scots; Ri­chard Earl of Clare, Ranulph Earl of Chester, William Earl of Tutesbu­ry, and Walran Earl of Warwick, Roger Constable of Chester, William de Mowbray, and many other Earls and Barons; to whom they promised [Page 17] and engaged, that John Duke of Normandy should restore to every Man his Right, if they would keep Faith and Peace with him: Ibid. n. 50. Súb hac igitur Conventione supradicti Comites, &c. According to this Agreement, the said Earls and Barons swore Fealty and faithful Service to John Duke of Normandy, against all Men. This was done while he was in Normandy.

Ibid. f. 451. a. n. 10. On the 25th of May following, Duke John crossed the Seas from Normandy into England, and the next day came to London; and there were convened in Expectation of him, Hubert Arch-Bishop of Canter­bury, John Arch-Bishop of Dublin, William Bishop of London, Gilbert of Rochester, John of Norwich, Hugh of Lincoln, Eustace of Ely, God­frid of Winchester, Henry of Exeter, Sefrid of Chichester, Jeffrey of Coventry, Savaric of Bath, Herbert of Salisbury, Philip of Durham, Roger of St. Andrews in Scotland, Henry of Landaff, Bishops: Robert Earl of Leicester, Richard Earl of Glare, William of Tutesbury, Hame­lin de Warenn, William of Salisbury, William de Strigvil, Walran of Warwick, Roger Bigot; William de Arundell, Ranulph de Cestre, Earls: and many Barons. And then Hubert Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Consecrated and Crowned the said John Duke of Normandy, King of England, in the Church of St. Peter at Westminster, on the 27th. of May, being Ascension Day.

Not one word here of any Election by, but only a Submission from the Barons Spiritual and Temporal, to King John; and a Recognition that he was their King. And all this related by Hoveden, in all proba­bility an Eye-witness of this Translation.

Indeed Matthew Paris, King Richard died, An. Dom. 1199. who died Anno Dom. 1259. was then either unborn, or so young as not with Judgment to take sufficient notice of this Affair, relates it thus; Paris, f. 197. n. 20. Congregatis in adventu ejus Archiepisco­pis, Episcopis, Comitibus & Baronibus, atque aliis omnibus, qui ejus Corona­tioni interesse debuerant; Archiepiscopus stans in medio omnium, dixit, au­dite universi, noverit discretio vestra, quod nullus proevia ratione alii succedere habet Regnum, nisi ab universitate Regni unanimiter invocata Spiritus Gratia electus, & secundum morum suorum eminentiam praeelectus, ad exemplum & fimilitudinis Saul primi Regis inuncti, quem praeposuit Dominus populo suo, non Regis filium, nec de Regali stirpe procreatum, si­militer post eum David Jesse silium: Hunc quia strenuum, & aptum Dig­nitati Regiae; illum quia sanctum & humilem, ut sic qui cunctos in regno supereminet strenuitate, omnibus praefit, & potestate & regimine, verum si quis ex stirpe Regis defuncti aliis prepolleret, pronius & promptius, in ele­ctionem ejus est consentiendum. Haec idcirco diximus, pro inclyto Comite Johanne, qui praesens est, frater illustrissimi nameri Richardi jam defuncti, qui haerede caruit ab eo egrediente, qui providus & strenuus & manifeste no­bilis, quem nos, invocata Spiritus Sancti Gratia, ratione tam meritorum, quom Sanguinis Regii, unanimiter elegimus universi, Ibid. n. 30, 40. nec ausi erant alii su­per his adhuc ambigere, scientes quod Archiepiscopus sine causa, hoc non sic diffiniverat, verum Comes Johannes & omnes hoc acceptabant, ipsumque Comitem in Regem eligentes & assumentes exclamant, dicentes, vivat Rex; Interrogatus autem postea Archiepiscopus Hubertus, quare haec dixisset, re­spondet ve praesagia mente conjecturare, & quibusdam Oraculis Edoctum & Certificatum fuisse, quod ipse Johannes Regnum & Coronam Angliae foret [Page 18] aliquando corrupturus, & in magnam confusionem praecipitaturus, &, ne ha­beret liberas habenas hoc faciendi, ipsum electione, non successione haeredita­ria, Elegi debere affirmabat. That is,

The Arch-Bishops, Note here Suc­cessione haere­ditaria eligere, which can signifie nothing but to recognize, and acknow­ledge him King by Hereditary Succession Bishops, Earls and Barons, and all others (Offi­cers probably required to be there) which ought to be present at his Coronation meeting at London. The Arch Bishop standing in the middle of them, said, ‘Hear all of you, your Discretion shall know, that no Man hath Right to succeed in the Kingdom, unless, after seeking God, he be unanimously chosen by the University of the Kingdom, (that is, those that are here said to meet at London.) And according to the Eminency of his Endowments, pre-elected, according the Example and Similitude of Saul, the first anointed King, whom God set over his People; not the Son of a King, or of the Royal Line. like­wise after him, David; the Son of Jesse. This because stout and fit for Royal Dignity: the other because holy and humble. That so he which exceeded all Men of the Kingdom in Strength or Prowess, should be set over all in Power and Government. but if an of the Progeny of the dead King did excell others, they ought more readily to consent to the Election of him. These things we have therefore said in the behalf of the famous Earl John, who is here present, the Brother of our most illustrious dead King Richard, that died with­out Issue of his Body; who is Provident, Stout, and manifestly Noble, whom we, having invoked the Grace of the Holy Spirit, have all of us unanimously chosen. Nor dare any others so much as doubt of these things, knowing the Arch-Bishop had not thus decreed this Mat­ter without Cause.’ But Earl John and all there acquiesced in what he had said; and chusing or acknowledging, and receiving him for their King, shouted, saying, Let the King live. But Arch-Bishop Hubert being asked afterward, why he said these things? answered, that he guessed, and was taught and ascertained by certain Oracles, that John would bring the Kingdom and Crown into great Confusion: And therefore, lest he might have too much Liberty in doing it, he affirm­ed, he ought to come in by Election, and not by Hereditary Successi­on: and so was Crowned as before rehearsed.

This Learned Doctrine and Preachment of the Arch-Bishop asserts not any Right of Election in the Convention of Bishops, Earls, Barons, and o­thers required to be at the Coronation; but by his own Answer, when he was asked why he said these things, it clearly discovers a Design only and Artifice in the Arch-Bishop, to cause them to set up, and make John King: In which also he denies any such Right of Election.

Hoveden hath none of, nor doth mention this Harangue; and there­fore it seems rather to be an invention of Matthew Paris, than a Sermon of the Arch-Bishop. Historians commonly make Speeches for other Men they write of Brompton takes no notice of it; all he says is, that Col. 1281. n. 40, 50. Johannes Lundoniam veniens in Festo ascensionis Domini, VI. Kalend▪ Junii, Anno Dom. 1199. ab Huberto Contuariensi Archiepiscopo in Ec­clesia B. Petri Westmonasterii inungitur & in Regem Angliae coronatur, assistente Prelatorum, Comitum, Baronum, & aliorum Nobilium multitu­dine infinita. John coming to London on Ascension-Day, the 27th of June, 1199. was Anointed and Crowned king of England By Hubert [Page 19] Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, in St. Peter's Church in Westminster, an in­finite multitude of Bishops, Earls, Barons, and other Noble men assist­ing him. Not one word here, or in Hovedon, or Paris, of the ordi­nary People.

And this Doctrine of the Arch-Bishop concerning the Election of Kings, if meant according to the Modern Understanding of it, was then new; for Gervase, a Monk of Canterbury, in the Year, 1122. speaking of the Coronation of Henry the First, says, It was manifest, and known almost to all Men, than the Kings of England were only obliged and bound to God for the Possession of the Kingdom, and to the Church of Canterbury for their Coronation. Col. 1338. n. 30. Manifestum est au­tem & omnibus sere notur, Reges Angliae soli Deo obligari, & teneri ex­ipsius regni adeptione, & ECclesiae Canturiensi ex Coronatione.

King John doth say in a Moderat Feod. Mag [...]. Sigilli. Charter dated the first Year of his Reign, that he came to the Crown, Jure haereditario & mediante tam Cleri­quam populi unanimi consensu & favore: By Right of Inheritance, and by unanimous Consent and Favour, as well of the Clergy as Laity. This unanimous Consent of the Clergy and Laity was rather their Ac­knowledgment and Submission than any thing, else: for, according to Hove­den's Relation of his coming to the Crown, which is the most exact extant, They submitted and swore Fealty to him against all Men before he came into England some time before his Coronation. Nor could it be true that he had an Hereditary Right; for Arthur Duke of Britain, Son and Heir to his elder Brother Jeffrey, and his Sister Eleanor, was then living: unless ho had regard to the Donation of his brother Ri­chard, and so esteemed himself a Testamentary Heir.

After the death of King John, Paris, f. 289. n. 10. Henry the Third, his eldest Son, and Heir, by the Assistance of the Loyal Barons, was Crowned King, not­withstanding the Barons which had made War against King John, when they were reduced to great Streights, Ibid, 279. n, 20. called out of France, Lewes, the King's Son; to whom Ibid. 282. n. 10. they, with the Londoners, sware Feal­ty, and advanced him to the Throne, and adhered to him against their own Prince; Ibid. 296. n. 40. 297. n. 30. 299. n. 20. until by Force they were reduced, and he driven out of the Kingdom. This Treasonable calling in of Lewes some that are pertinacious in the fancy of Election, will have it to be one. Paris, f. 288. lin. 2. Westmin. f. 276. n. 40. Indeed King Henry the Third at this time had no good Hereditary Title; and therefore, Johannes ex hac vita transmigravit, Henricum primogenitum suum regni constituens haeredem. And this Donation of his Father, or his making him his Heir, was his best Title; for until that Eleanor, the Daughter of his Uncle Jeffrey, died, in the twenty fifth Year of his Reign, he was not true Heir by Right of Blood. Obiit Eleanora (saith Matthew Paris) filia Galfridi Comitis Britanniae: in clau­sura diuturna carceris sub arcta custodia reservata, fol. 574. n. 40. 25 H. 3. Anno Dom. 1241.

To Henry the Third succeeded his eldest Son Edward the First, though the Lancastrians said his second Son Edmund, commonly called Crouch-Back, was the eldest, and laid aside for his deformity; on whose Per­son was originally founded the great Contention between the two Royal Houses of York and Lancaster. But that he was really the eldest there can be no pretence, however the Lancastrians imposed upon the People. [Page 20] For Edward was born Paris, f. 488. n. 30, 40. June 16. 1239. and Edmund upon the Ibid. f. 654. n. 20. 16th. of January, 1245. being Marcellus his Day, six Years after. Ed­ward, by that time he was a Year old, was acknowledged the First­born of his Father, his Brother Edmund not then born. Ibid. f. 527. n. 40. Anno Dom. 1240. Per idem tempus Rex Cives Londinenses, & quinque portuum custodes, & multos a­lios fecit jurare fidelitatem, & ligantiam Edwardo primogenito suo. In the Letter from the Loyal, to the Rebellious Barons, he is styled the First-born of King Henry. Ibid. f. 994. n. 50. Richardus Dei gratia Rex Romanorum semper Augustus, & Edwardus illustris Regis Angliae primogenitus, &c. And very frequently Matthew Paris, who lived at this time, and was Historiographer to his Father, calls him his First-born. So that there can be no doubt in History that he was the eldest Son; for King Henry the Third had only these two Sons, Edward and Edmund.

After the death of Edward the First, Brief. History of Succession, f. 6. his Son Edward the Second suc­ceeded him; and, as Men of purely Commonwealth-Principles tell us, he degenerating from so great a Father, the People grew weary of his Irregular Arbitrary Government; deposed him, and chose Edward his Son to reign in his stead. A plain Argument, say they, of the Peoples Power in chusing their Kings, aud of limiting and binding the Suc­cession.

But whoever reads this story, will not find the ordinary People had much, if any thing to do in this matter, further than as they were ex­cited to Tumults and Railing at the Government, by many of the Popu­lar Bishops and Barons; for they always have been, and ever will be, Instruments of designing Men against the Government, if by remiss­ness thereof, and easiness of Governors, they be permitted. This King was deposed and murdered by a wicked Confederacy and Rebellion of many Bishops and Barons. And there is nothing to justifie this Rebellion, Deposition and Murther, in which our Anti-Monarchical Men instance so often as an Example to be followed, but the meer doing of it: And if a fact be therefore lawful, only because it is done, we have no need of Laws, Lawyers, or Officers of Justice, to maintain, plead for, or de­fend it. The truth is, this King was not of so brisk a temper as his Fa­ther, nor endowed with so much Courage: he was more soft and easie, and used too great and unseasonable Indulgence to such as he permitted to guide his Affairs, and the Affairs of the Kingdom in his Name.

From hence many Rebellious Barons, under pretence of the Vid. Preamble to the Ordinan­tes made by an extorted Com­mission to cer­tain Ordainers, dated Mar. 16. 3 Ed.2. but not executed until the fifth of his Reign. Ordi­nance, 13, 14, 16. Rot. part. 5 Ed. 2. Tho. Walsingham, f. 113. lin. 48. Ho­nour of God and Holy Church, the Honour of the King and Realm, made Confederations to remove evil Counsellors, reform the Court, and to force the King to let them name all Judges, the Chancellor, Treasurer, and other great Officers in Court, Gascoigne, Ireland and Scotland.

Thomas Duke of Lancaster, one of those Commissioners and Ordain­ers, was always the Head of these Confederacies, Vid. Memo­randa Parlia­menti, 9 Ed. 2. apud Lincoln. who pretended great Affection to the King, to the common profit of the Realm, and great care to see these Ordinances, cited in the Margin, maintained in all points, and many things amended in the King's Houshold, Court and Realm.

At length this great Earl of Lancaster Walsingham f. 116. n. 20, 30, 40. behaved himself very inde­cently towards the KIng, and used him with much Scorn and Contempt; until at last, in the fifteenth of his Reign, he and many of his Confe­derates [Page 21] brake out into open Rebellion, at Burton upon Trent; and fly­ing before the King's Army Northward, was, with many others, taken at Burrough-Bridge in York-shire: and being tried by his Peers, was ad­judged to be Hanged, Drawn and Quartered: which Sentence was pardoned by the King, and he was only beheaded. The like Sentence had Warren de Insula, William Toket, Thomas Maudut; Henry de Brad­born, William Fitz-William, and William Cheyne, the Lord Roger Clif­ford, the Lord John de Mounbray, the Lord Henry Tyes, the Lord Bar­tholomew de Badlesmere, & Joscelin de Invilla; most of them Barons. Propter Roberias & Felonias & resistentiam quam fecerunt contra Regem ad villam de Burton, Occidentes Regis familiares, & Regis transitum pro­hibentes, & partem villae praedictae comburentes, &c. For Robberies and Felonies, and the Resistance they made against the King at the Town of Burton; killing the King's Friends and Servants, and burn­ing part of the Town upon their Retreat.

The Ordinances before-mentioned, in number forty one, were re­voked, and the Confederations and Tumultuous Barons and their Actions consured, in a Great Stat. Rol.ab Hen. 3. ad 21 Ed. 3. m. 31. Bib. Cott. Claudius, D. 2. f. 232. a. Parliament holden at York, 15 Ed. 2. The Ordinances were revoked upon Examination of them before the Pre­lates, Earls, Barons, (amongst which were all the Ordiners then alive) and the Commons of the Realm: For that, by the things which were ordained, The King's Royal Power was restrained in many things, against the due Greatness of his Seigniory Royal, and contrary to the State of the Crown. And also, for that in times past, by such Ordinances and Oxford Pro­visions, 42 H. 3. Pro­visions made by Subjects over the Power Royal of the Ancestors of the Lord the King, Troubles and Wars came upon the Realm, by which the Nation was in danger. and it was accorded and established in the said Parliament, by the Lord the King, and by the said Prelates, Earls and Barons, and all the Commonalty of the Realm at that Parliament assembled; That all those things by the Ordiners ordained, and contained in the said Ordinan­ces from henceforth, for the time to come, should cease; and lose their Force, Vertue and Effect for euer. And that from hence forward, in no time, no manner of Ordinances or Provisions made by the Subjects of the Lord the King, or his Heirs, by any Power or Commission whatsoever, over and upon the Power Royal of the said Lord the King, or his Heirs, or against the State of the Crown, shall be of no value or force. But the things which shall be established for the Estate of the King and his Heirs, and for the Estate of the Realm and People, may be treated, accorded and established in Parliament, by the King, and by the Assent of the Prelates, Earls, Ba­rons, and Communalty of the Realm.

Roger de Mortuo-Mari, Lord of Wigmore, Walsingham, f. 115. n. 40. submitted himself to the King, which much weakned the Barons Forces before the Engagement at Burton, and was sent to the Tower of London; from whence he made his Escape after two Years Imprisonment, in the seventeenth of this King's Reign, and went over Sea to the King of France; who at this time required the King of England to do him Ibid. f. 119. n. 20. Homage for Gas­coygn and other Territories he held of him in France. But he delaying to do it, and excusing himself by Ibid. f. 120. n. 20. Messengers, who prevailed not, the King of France, with an Ibid. n. 40. Army, seized Gascoign, and the Coun­ty of Pontheu: yet by the means of Edmund of Woodstock, the King's [Page 22] Brother, and other English Noble-men then in France, a Truce was made with the King of France for a certain time, until a Peace might be treated of. Ibid. f. 121. n. 30. The Year following, the Bishops of Winchester and Norwich, with John de Britannia Earl of Richmond, were employed to that purpose: and after much desceptation about it, they received a Form of Peace from the King of France. And at length the Ibid. n. 40. & Cl. 20. Ed. 3. m. 11. Dors. Queen, by Advice given by the Bishops and Great Men to the King, was sent to her Brother, the King of France, for making up, and Confirmation of the Peace. Walsingham, ibid. n. 40. and it was accorded, that King Edward should give the Prince, his Son, the Dutchy of Aquitain and County of Pontheu, that he should go over into France, and do Homage for them; which he did accordingly.

But the Prince being in France with his Mother, she had no mind to return. Cl. 19. Ed. 2. m. 2. The King sent divers Letters to his Son Edward, and his Queen Isabel; expostulating the Cause of their stay in France against his Will, and the Confederation they made there with Roger Mortimer, his Enemy and Rebel, and others.

Walsingham says, F. 122, n. 10. She was gene­rally reported to be a vile Wo­man; cruel and unchast. Some affirmed she stayed there against her Will Alii voro asserebant quod voluntarie propter nimiam familiaritatem tunc contractam inter Reginam & Rogerum de Mortuo-mari si [...] quo & aliis Nobilibus de Anglia profugatis nolluit dicta Regina redire, & maxime in odium dispensatorum. But others affirmed she stayed voluntarily, by reason of the too great Familiarity she had contracted with Earl Roger Mortimer, Ibid. f. 125. lin. 49. without whose Advice she did nothing; and without whom, and the other Noble-men that had fled out of England, she would not return; and especially for the Hatred she bare towards the Spencers; proud, ambitious, haughty and covetous Men, by whom the King was too much swayed in the Management of his Affairs; which might give a dissatisfaction to the Nobility, though not war­rant their Actions.

The next Ibid f. 123. n. 20, 30.] Year, having married the Prince (not then fourteen Years old) to the Earl of Hanault's Daughter, who furnished her with Shipping, and two thousand seven hundred and fifty Men, led by his Bro­ther John, she, with Edmund Earl of Kent, and Roger Mortimer Lord of Wigmore, and many other Great Men who had sled out of England, landed at Harwich; to whom the Earl Marshal, the Earl of Leicester, and other Barons and Knights of those Parts, and almost all the Bishops, did adhere: and proceeding, her Army daily increased; so as at last she took her Husband, the Ibid. f. 125. n. 30. King, Prisoner, and put to death both the Spencers; the Younger without Ibid. n. 50. Hearing or Answering. 'The imprisoned King was carried and removed from place to place, but at last fixed at Berkeley-Castle in Glocester shire, under the Guard of Tho­mas Berkeley and John Maltravers, who had allowed Cl. 1. Ed. 3. Part 1. m. 3. Dors. an hundred Shillings a Day for his Expences arid Keeping. The Queen never would see him during his Imprisonment. Wals. f. 127. lin. 36. Regina misit sibi Indumenta de­licata, & Literas blandientes, sed tamen ipsum videre nolebat, fingens quod communitas regni non permisit. The Queen sent him gay Cloaths and flattering Letters, but would not see him; feigning the Commu­nity of the Kingdom would not permit her.

[Page 23] He was Ibid. n. 40. Kinghton says, Octabis Epi­phaniae, Eight days after Twelfth Day. Col. 25 [...]9. n. 50. made Prisoner, November 16. and the Morrow after Twelfth-Day, all the Nobility of the Kingdom being summoned to Parlia­ment, met at London, and judged the King unit to rule, and for seve­ral Reasons to be deposed; and his Son, Prince Edward to be chosen King. Walsingham, f. 126. n. 20, 30. Convenit Londoniis tota Nobilitas regni citata per prius ad Par­liamentum tenendum ibidem in crastino Epiphaniae, ubi cuncti censuerunt Regem indignum Diademate, & propter plures Articulos deponendum, & Edvardum filium ejus primogenitum in Regem unanimiter eligendum, quod etiam consequenter factum est. Of which Transaction, when the Queen had notice, she was full of Grief outwardly (ut for is apparuit) saith Wal­singbam: But the Prince, Ibid. lin. 39. affected with this outward Passion of his Mo­ther, as young as he was, would not accept of this Title (whether out of his own Apprehension of things, or by grave and mature Advice, which is most probable.) Et Ibid. n. 40. Juravit quod invito patre nunquam sus­ciperet coronam Regni: And swore, that without his Father's Consent, he would never take upon him the Crown of the Kingdom. Where­upon, several Ibidem. Messengers being dispatched to the King, then Pri­soner at Kenelworth-Castle, who told him what had been done and con­cluded of, and diligently required him to resign his Royal Dignity and Crown, and permit his Son to reign in his stead.

He was much disturbed with the Message; and said, Since it could be no otherwise, he thanked them for chusing his First-born Son; making his Resignation, and delivering up the Royal Ensigns, or Tokens of Sovereignty.

This done, Edward the Third directs his Writs to the Sheriffs of the several Counties, for preserving and keeping the Peace; with this Preamble.

Rex Cl. 1. Ed. 3. Part. 1. m. 28. Walsingham, f. 126. n. 50. Vicecom. Ebor. Salutem. Quia Dominus Edwardus nuper Rex Angliae Pater Noster de Communi Consilio & assensu Praelator. Com. Baron. & alior. Magnat. necnon Communitat. totius Regni praedict. SPONTA­NEA VOLUNTATE se amovit a Regimine dicti Regni VOLENS & CONCEDENS quod nos tanquam ipsius primogenitus & HAERES ipsius regni qubernationem & regimen assumemus, nosque ipsius patris nostri bene­placito in hac parte de consilio & avisamento Praelator. Note de Consi­lio & Avila­mento, not [...] ­lectione, &c. Com. Baron. Magnat. & Comitat. praedict. annuentes Gubernacula suscepimus dicti regni; & side litates & Homag. ipsorum Praelator, & Magnat. recepimus ut est moris. Teste Rege apud Westmonas [...]erium, 29 Jan.

[Page 24] Nine days after he was invested with Kingship; and not long after that King Edward the Second was murdered in Berkeley-Castle.

Any Man, though but of an indifferent Capacity, that seriously con­siders the story of this unfortunate Prince, will easily perceive he was deposed by notorious Rebellion, raised by factious Bishops and Tumultuous Barons; and not without great suspition of an intended Ʋsurpation by Thomas Earl of Lancaster: and may easily see through the Contrivance of the Queen and Mortimer afterwards: and from thence cannot but judge it to have been a Design of wicked popular Barons, and not the A­ction, much less the Choice of the People.

In the Fourth of Edward the Third, Rot. Parl. 4 Ed. 3. n. 1. Roger Mortimer, Earl of March, was impeached in Parliament for divers Felonies and Treasons; for as­suming to himself Royal Power, making Dissention between King Ed­ward the Second and his Queen, and for murdering of him, and many other great Treasons: and adjudged to be Drawn and Hanged, and was executed accordingly. And the Earl Marshal was commanded to do the Execution; and the Mayor, Aldermen and Sheriffs of London, and Constable of the Tower, to guard and assist him.

Many of his Accomplices had the same Judgment. Ibid. n. 2, 3, 4, 5.

In the Fiftieth of Edward the Third, Rot. Parl. 50. Ed. 3. n. 40. al. 50. the Parliament do acknowledge Richard the Second to be very Heir to the Crown, as Son to Edward the Black Prince, very Heir to the Crown; and petition the King (his Father being dead) to make him Prince of Wales.

Who, after his Grandfather's death, was immediately by all people, the Walsingham, fol. 193. n. 40. Ibid. f. 195. n. 10. Londoners especially, acknowledged, owned and addressed to as King; and not long after Third Vol. of Chron. f. 508. n. 50. Crowned with great Solemnity. He liv­ed continually in Tumults, and by his Great Uncles his Reign was made uneasie, and at length was deposed and murdered by a Potent Faction.

The Author of the Brief History of Succession, fol. 7. recommends to his Readers the thirty three Articles drawn up against Richard the Se­cond, as well deserving to be read; with hope and design, as easily may be guessed, to make them believe and think he was justly deposed and murdered. But Mr. Hollingshed, a moderate Writer, who hath truly related these Articles, and all the Transactions of his Deposition and Mur­der, tells us, [y] that whatsoever Writers do report, touching the state of the time and doings of this King, yet if he might boldly speak what he thought, He was a Prince the most unthankfully used of his Subjects of any one of whom ye shall lightly read: For, although (through Frailty of Youth) he de­meaned himself more dissolutely than seemed convenient for his Royal Estate, and made choice of such Counsellors as were not favoured of the People; whereby he was the less favoured himself. Yet in no King's days were the Commons in greater Wealth, if they could have perceived their happy State. Neither in any other time were the Nobles and Gentlemen more cherished, nor Church-men less wronged. But such was their Ingratitude towards their bountiful and loving Sovereign, that those whom he had chiefly advanced, were readiest to control him, for that they might not rule all things at their Will, and remove from him such as they misliked, and place in their rooms whom they thought good; and that rather by strong Hand, than by gentle and courteous means: Which stirred such malice betwixt him and them,

[Page 25] The chief Instruments in deposing this King were Henry Duke of Lan­caster, Walsingham, f. 358. n. 50. late Earl of Derby, and Thomas Arundel Arch-Bishop of Canter­bury: who assisted by others, reduced the unfortunate King to so great Straits, as he was weary of his Government. They having him in their power, kept him safe in the Tower of London, until a Parliament was called; which was suddainly done, by directing Writs in the King's Ibid. f. 359. lin. 1. Name to those who of Right ought to be there. All things were prepared for the Resignation of his Crown against the time of the meeting of the Parliament. He Rot. Parl. 1. H. 4. n. 52. was, by certain Commissioners appointed by it, deposed; or had rather a Resignation of the Crown extorted from him, though he seemed willing and forward to do it.

And then the Duke of Lancaster claimed the Crown in Parliament, and challenged the Realm, Ibid. n. 53. ALS DESCENDIT BE RYGHT LYNE OF THE BLODE COMEYNGE FRO THE GUDE LORD HENRY THERDE.

Postquam quidem Ibid. n. 54. vindicationem & clameum tam Domini Spiritua­les quam Temporales, & omnes status ibidem praesentes, singillatim & com­muniter interrogati, quid de illa vindicatione & clameo sentiebant. Iidem status cum toto populo absque quacunque difficultate vel mora, ut Dux prae­fatus super eos regnaret, unanimitur consenserunt.

After which Claim and Challenge, as well the Lords Spiritual as Tem­poral, and all States there present being severally asked what they thought of that Challenge and Claim, the same States, with all the People, without difficulty or delay, consented the aforesaid Duke should reign over him.

And then shewing to the States the Ibid. Suae vo­luntatis. Signet of King Richard, which he gave him, as token of his desire to have him succeed him; The Arch-Bishop, taking him by the Right Hand, placed him in the Throne.

Here we see the Foundation of the Parliament's Consent that Henry should be King, was a pretended Right of Blood, and the desire of King Ri­chard that it might be so.

Henry the Fourth was Son to John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, fourth Son to Edward the Third, by Blanch his Wife, Daughter and Heir of Henry Duke of Lancaster, Son of Henry Earl of Lancaster, Brother and Heir to Thomas Earl of Lancaster, eldest Son to Edmund called Crouch-Back the First Earl of Lancaster, Second Son to King Henry the Third.

Upon Sir J. Ha­ward's Life of Hen. 4. p. 98. Consideration had of this Title it was conceived to be in­sufficient, and that it would pass for a Blind and Pretence only. And therefore king Henry, upon the day of his Coronation, caused to be proclaimed, Ibid. p. 99. That he claimed the Kingdom of England; First, By Right of Conquest. Secondly, Because King Richard had resigned his Estate, and de­signed him for his Successor. And Lastly, Because he was of the Blood-Royal, and NEXT HEIR MALE UNTO KING RICHARD.

In this Claim he takes no notice of any Election by the People, nor doth own the least Right in them to elect him; but founds his Title upon Conquest, and Proximity of Male-Blood, and Donation of Ri­chard the Second.

Henry the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth held the Crown by Ʋsurpation, without much disturbance, until the thirty ninth Year of Henry the [Page 26] Sixth; Rot. Parl. 39 H 6. n. 11. when Richard Duke of York put in his Claim, as Hein to Philippa, Daughter and Heir to Lionel, the third gotten Son of King Edward the Third; to whom the Right, Title Dignity Royal, and Estate o the Crowns of the Realms of England, and of France, and of the Lordship and Land of Ireland, of Right, and Law, and Custom appertaineth and be­longeth, before any Issue of John of Gaunt, the fourth gotten Son of the same King Edward.

The Lords Spiritual and Temporal, Ibid. n. 12. the Question being put what they thought of the Duke's Claim, answer, that The Matier was so high, and of such wyght, that it was not to any of the King's Subjects to enter into Communication thereof, without his high Commandment, Agreement and Consent had thereto.

The Duke pressing for an Answer, Ibidem. all the Lords went unto the King, and opened the Claim by the Mouth of the Chancellor of England; and it pleased him to pray and command all the said Lords, that they should search, as much as in them was, to find all such things as might be object, and leyde against the Cleym and Title of the Due.

Whereupon, Ibidem. in the Morning, October 18. the Lords sent for the King's Justices to defend his Title, against the Claim of the Duke of York; and in the King's Name, streightly command them to find all Objections as might he laid against the same, in fortifying of the King's Title.

Who, Ibidem. on Monday following, on the 20th of October, answered, that the matter was so high, and touched the King's high Estate and Regalio, which is above the Law, and passed their Learning: Wherefore they durst not enter into any Communication of the same, for that it permined to the Lords of the King's Blode, and th'Apparage of this his Londes and therefore besought all the Lords to have then utterly excused.

Then the Lords sent for all the King's Serjeants and Attorney, Ibidem. and gave them streight Commandment in the King's Name, that they sad­ladly and avisely shuld serch, and take all such things as might be best and strongest to be allegged for the King's Avail in Objection, and defeating of the Title, and Cleym of the Due.

They answered, Ibidem. that if this matter passed the Lerning of the Justices, it must needs exceed their Lerning: and also that they durst not enter into any Communication in that matier: and prayed and besought all the Lords to have them excused by geveing any Avice or Counsell therein. But the Lords would not excuse them: and therefore, by the in Advice and Assistance it was concluded by all the Lords, that the Articles, following should be ob­jected agenst the Clayme and Title of the Duc.

To which Articles the Duke answered,

First, That noe Oath being the Lawe of Man, Ibid. n. 14. ought to be performed when the same leadeth to suppression of Trueth and Right, which is against the Lawe of God.

To the second and third, Ibid. n. 15. That in trouth there been noo such Acts and Tayles made by eny Parliament heretofore, as it is furmised, but only in the Cap. 2. seventh yere of King Hen. IV. a certain Act and Ordinance was made in a Parliament by him called, wherein he made the Reaums of Englond and France, amongst other, to be unto him, and to the Hetres of his Body comeing, and to his four Sons, and to the Heires of their Body comeing, in manner and fourme as it apperith in the same Act. And if he might have obteyned and rejoysed the Corones, &c. by Title of In­haeritance, Discenter, or Succession, He neither needed or would have desired or made thaim to be granted to him in such wyse as be by the said Act, which tacketh noo place, neither is of eny force or effect ayenst him that is right Inhaeriter of the sayd CORONES, as it accordeth with Gods Lawe, and all Natural Lowes; howe it be that all other Acts and Ordinances made in the seyd Parliament [...]then, been good and sufficient ayenst all other Persons.

To the fourth That such seyeing of the King Henry the Fourth may in noe wise be true; Ibid. n. 17. and that the contrary thereof, which is trouth, shall be largely enough shewed, approved and justified by sufficient Autorite, and matter of Record; and over, that his seyd seying was onely to sha­dowe and cover fraudulently his seyd unrightwyse and violent Ʋsurpation, and by that moyen to abuse disceyveably the People standing about him.

Upon consideration of this Answer, and Claim of the Duke of York, Ibid. n. 18. it was concluded and agreed by all the Lords, That his Title could not be DEFETED; and therefore for eschuying the great Incon­venients that may ensue, a mean was found to save the Kings Honor and Estate, and to appease the said Due, IF HE WOULD; which was, That the King should enjoye the Corone during Life, the Duke to be declared the true Heir, and to possess it after his Death &c.

In the first Article of this Agreement, or Accord, (as 'tis there called) the Title of the Duke of York is set forth; and the Judgment of the Parliament given, what then was, and before had been the Foundation and ground of the Succession to the Crown of England, tint is, Proximi­ty of Blood. The Articles follow, so much of them as is pertinent to this matter.

First, Where the seyd Richard Due of Yorke hath declared and open­ed, as above, his seyd Title and Cleyme in manner as followeth. That the right noble and worthy Prince Herry King of Englond the Third, had Issue and leefully gate Edward his first-begotten Son, born at Westminster [Page 28] the xv Kalend of Juyle, in the Vigil of St. Mart. & Marcellian. the Yere of our Lord M.CC. XXXIX. and Edmund his second goten Son, which was born on Seint Marcell. day, the Yere of our Lord M. CC. XLV. The which Edward, after the death of the seyd King Herry his Fader, entitu­led and called King Edward the First, had Issue Edward his first-begoten Son, entituled and called after the decease of the seyd first Edward his Fader, King Edward the Second; which had Issue and leefully gate the ryght Noble and Honourable Prynce Edward the Third, true and undoubt­ed King of Englond, and of France, and Lord of Ireland: Which Ed­ward the Third, true and undoubted King of Englond, and of France, and Lord of Irelond, had Issue and leefully gate Edward his first begot­ten Son, Prynce of Wales; William Hatfield, second- begotten; Leonell; third-begoten, Duc of Clarence; John of Gaunt, fourth-begotten, Duc of Lancaster; Edmund Langley, fifth begoten, Duc of Yorke; Thomas Woodstock, sixth-begoten, Duc of Gloucester; and William Wyndesore, the seventh-begotten. The seyd Edward Prynce of Wales, which dyed in the lyfe of the seyd Edward King, had Issue and leefully gate Richard, the which succeeded the same Edward King, his Grandfather, in Royal Dig­nity, entituled and called king Richard the Second, and dyed without Is­sue. William Hatfield, the second-goten Son of the seyd Edward King, dyed without Issue. Leonell, the third-goten Son of the same king Ed­ward, had Issue and leefully gate Philippa his oonly Daughter and Heir, which by the Sacrament of Matrymony copled unto Edmund Mortimer Erle of March, had Issue and leefully bare Rogier Mortimer Erle of March, her, Son and Heir: Which Rogier Erle of March had Issue and leefully gate Edmund Erle of Marche, Rogier Mortymer, Anne, and Alianore; which Edmund, Rogier, and Alianore dyed without Issue. And the seyd Anne, under the Sacrament of Matrymony, copled unto Ri­chard Erle of Cambridge, the Son of the seyd Edmund Langley, fifth-begoten Son of the seyd King Edward, as it is afore specified, had Issue and leefully bare Richard Plantagenet, commonly called Duc of Yorke: The seyd John of Gaunt, the fourth-goten Son of the seyd King Edward, and younger Brother of the seyd Leonell, had Issue and leefully gate Hen. Erle of Derby, which incontinent after the tyme that the seyd King Ri­chard resigned the Corones of the seyd Reaumes, and the seyd Lordship of Ireland, unrightwysely entered upon the same, then being on live Edmund Mortymer Erle of Marche, Son to Rogier Mortymer Erle of March, Son and Heir of the seyd Phelippa, Daughter and Heir of the seyd Sir Leonell, the third Son of the seyd King Edward the Third; to the which Edmund the Ryght and Title of the seyd Corones and Lordship by Lawe and Custome belonged.

Before we pass over these three Usurpers, Lib. 22. sub ini­tio, fol. 433. n. 30. we must take notice of a Passage in Polydore Virgil concerning Henry V. in these Words: Prin­ceps Hen. facto Patris funere, Concilium Principum ad Westmonasterium convocandum curat, in quo dum de Rege creando more, mojorum agitaba­tur, Ecce tibi de repente aliquot Principes ultro in EJƲS VERBA ju­rare coeperunt. Quod Benevolentiae Officium Edw. I. was in Palestina when his father died, yet ac­knowledged K. before his re­turn. K. John was acknow­ledged King before his Coro­nation also. nulli antea priusquam Rex renantiatus esset, praestitum constat: adeo Hen. ab ineunte aetate spem om­nibus optimae indolis fecit. Creatur itaque Rex ad quintum Iduum Aprilis eo Anno quo Pater e vita excesserat, & Quintus ejus Nominis Henricus dictus est.

[Page 29] The Fol. 7. Author of the Brief History of Succession thus renders this Sentence: The words are Concilium Principum convocandum curat. If this was a Parlia­ment, he must be King before be could call it. Immediately upon the death of Hen. IV. a Parliament MET at Westminster, and there, according to the Custom of the Realm; it was debated who should be King: But all men had entertained so good, thoughts of Prince Henry, that without staying till the whole Assem­bly had declared him King, divers of them began to swear Allegiance to him: a thing strange, and without president, as only occasioned by extraordinary Opinion which was generally conceived of him before, and the certain Title vested in him by He means the Act of Entail of the Usurpation, 7 H. 4. c. 2. Act of Parliament.

In his Citation of the Latin he leaves out these Words which belong to this piece of Story, and do declare the meaning of it: Creatur ita (que) Rex ad quintum Iduum Aprilis eo Anno quo Pater e vita excesserat, &c. He was Crowned King on the fifth of the Ides of April, the same year his Father died.

Tho. Walsingham who lived at this time, says, Hen. IV. died Mar. 20. 1413. And then, eodem Anno coronatus Londoniis Henricus Primogeni­tus Regis Henrici nuper defuncti quinto Iduum Aprilis, &c. The same Year Henry the First-born of King Henry lately deceased, was Crown­ed at London on the fifth of the Ides or tenth of April. By which Words of Walsingham 'tis evident he hath mistaken the meaning, and falsly translated the Words of Polydore; for they ought to be Englished in this manner.

Prince Henry having buried his Father, caused a Council of the Chief Men of the Nation to be called at Westminster, in which they treat, or debate about Crowning the King, according to the Custom of his Pre­decessors; forthwith some of the Great Men began to swear as he dictated to them, which officious Benevolence was performed to none be­fore he was declared King; such hope he had given from his Childhood of an excellent Disposition: therefore he was Crowned King on the fifth of the Ides of April, that Year his Father died, and was called Henry the Fifth. An intelligent Man would wonder how the Writer of the Brief History, &c. should SQƲEEZE his Translation out of these La­tin Words.

But Polydore, who, as I hinted before, was very unfit to write the English History, hath very oddly in Latin express'd this Relation, as he likewise hath done many other Stories. His Character take from Sir Hen. Savile, in his Epistle to Queen Elizabeth, before his Edition of the old English Writers after Bede. Polydorus (saith he) ut homo Italus, & in rebus nostris hospes (&c. quod caput est) neque in Republika versatus, nec magni alioqui vel judicii, vel ingenii, pauca ex multis delibans, & fal­fit plerumque pro veris amplexus, Historiam nobis reliquit cum caetera men­dosam tum exiliter sane & jejune conscriptam. Polydor, as he was an Italian, and a Stranger in our Affairs, and, which was the chief matter, not understanding our Government and Laws, nor otherwise of great Wit or Judgment, chusing a few things out of many, and oft-times ta­king false things for true, hath left us a very faulty History, slightly and pitifully written.

After the Reign of these three Usurpers, and Deposition of Henry the Sixth, in the Rot. Parl. n. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, &c. first of Edward the Fourth, the Proceedings against Richard the Second are Repealed, where 'tis said, That Henry [Page 30] Earl of Derby, afterwards Henry the Fourth, temerously ayenst ryghtwis­nesse and Justice, by Force and Arms, ayenst his Faith and Ligeance, rered Werre at Flynt in Wales ayenst King Richard the Second, him tooke, and imprisoned in the Tower of London, in great violence, and usurped and intruded upon the Royall Power, Estate, Dignity, &c. And not therewith satisfyed or content, but more grievous thing attempting, wickedly, of unna­tural, unmanly, and cruel Tyranny, the same King Richard, King Anointed, Crowned and Consecrated, and his Liege and most Soveraigne Lord in Earth, against Gods Lawe, Mans Ligeance, and Oath of Fidelity, with uttermost punicion, attormenting, murdered, and destroyed, with most vile, hainous, and lamentable Death, &c.

The Commons being of this present Parliament, Ibidem. having sufficient and evident knowledge of the said unryghtwyse Usurpation and In­trusion, by the said Henry late Earl of Derby, upon the said Crown of England; knoweing also certainly, without doubt and ambiguity, the Right and Title of our said Soveraigne Lord thereunto true, and that by Gods Lawe, Mans Lawe, and the Lawe of Nature, he, and none other, is, and ought to be, their true, ryghtwyse, and natural Liege, and Soveraigne Lord, and that he was in right from the Death of the said Noble and Famous Prince his Father, very just King of the said Realm of England, doe take, accept, and repute, and will for ever take, accept, and repute the said Edward the Fourth their Soveraigne and Liege Lord, and him and his Heirs to be Kings of England, and none other, according to his said Right and Title.

And that the same Henry unryghtwysely, Ibidem. against Lawe, Consci­ence, and Custome of the said Realm of England, usurped upon the said Crown and Lordship; and that he, and also Henry late called King Henry the Fifth, his Son, and Henry late called King Henry the Sixth, his Son, occupied the Realm of England and Lordship of Ireland, and exercised the Governance thereof, by unryghtwyse, intrusion, usurpa­tion and no otherwise.

That the Amotion of Henry, Ibidem. late called King Henry the Sixth, from the Exercise, Occupation, Usurpation, Intrusion, Reign, and Gover­nance of the same Realm and Lordship, done by our Soveraigne Lord King Edward the Fourth, was and is rightwyse, lawfull, and according to the Lawes and Customes of the said Realme, and soe ought to be taken, holden, reputed, and accepted.

Further, Ibidem. Some if not all the Grants made by Henry Earl of Derby, called Henry the Fourth, the said Henry his Son, or the said Henry cal­led Henry the Sixth, or by Authority of any pretenced Parliament in any of their days, were reputed null and void.

That the unrightwyse and unlawful Usurpation and Intrusion of the same Henry upon the Crown of England and Lordship of Ireland, Ibidem. was to the great and intolerable hurt, prejudice, and derogation of Edmund Mortimer Earle of Maroh, next Heir of Blood of the said King Richard at the time of his Death, and to the Heirs of the said Edmomd, and to the great and excessive Damage unto the Realm of England, and to the politick and peaceable Governance thereof, by inward Wars moved and grounded by occasion thereof.

[Page 31] In the First of Richard the Third, the Exact A­bridgment, fol. 712. In this Abridgement the whole Re­cord of 1 R. 3. is printed. Three Estates, after having much faulted the Government, Marriage, and Person of Edward the Fourth, and affirmed, That the Right and Title of the Issue of George Duke of Clarence was barred by his Attainder, and extolling the Parts, Wisdom, and Justice of Richard his Brother, declared him undoubted Heir of Richard Duke of York, Father to Edward the Fourth, very In­haeritor of the Crown of England, and Dignity Royal, and as in Right King of England Ibid. fol. 713. by way of Inheritance; and therefore having in his great prudent Justice, Princely Courage, and excellent Vertue, sin­gular Confidence, did by Writing (in all that in them lay) chuse him their King and Sovereign Lord, to whom they knew of certain it ap­perteined to be so chosen, &c.

And do further declare, Ibidem. That the Right, Title, and Estate which King Richard the Third had to, and in the Crown and Royal Dignity of the Realm of England, with all things thereunto within the said Realm, and without it, annexed and apperteining, was just and law­ful, as grounded upon the Laws of God and Nature, and also upon the antient Lawes and laudable Customes of this said Realm, as also taken and reputed by all such Persons as were learned in the abovesaid Laws and Customs.

And then they proceed, and say, Yet nevertheless, forasmuch as it is considered that the most part of the People is not sufficiently Ibid. f. 714. lear­ned in the aforesaid Laws and Customs, whereby the Truth and Right in this behalf of likelyhood may be hid, and not clearly known to all the People, and thereupon put in doubt and question. And over this, how that the Court of Parliament is of such Authority, and the People of this Land of such a nature and disposition, as Experience teacheth, that Manifestation or Declaration of any Truth made by the Three Estates of this Realm assembled in Parliament, and by Authority of the same, maketh before all other things most faithful and certain qui­eting of Mens minds, and removeth the occasion of Doubts and sedi­tious Language.

Therefore at the Request and by the Assent of the Three Estates of this Realm, Ibid. f. 717. THAT IS TO SAY, The Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons of this Land, assembled in this present Parliament, and by the Authority of the same, be it pronounced, decreed, and declared. That our said Sovereign Lord the King was and is the very undoubt­ed. King of this Realm of England, with all things thereunto belong­ing, within the said Realm, and without it, united, annexed, and ap­perteining, as well by Right of Consanguinity, and Inhaeritance, as by lawful Election, Election here signific no­thing but Re­cognition. Consecration, and Coronation.

Haereditary Right, and Right of Blood, was the Ground of this Esta­blishment.

Henry the Seventh having no Haereditary Title of his own, and being always Bacon's Hist. f. 7. averse to take upon him the only true and undoubted Title of his Queen, eldest Daughter and Heir to Edward the Fourth, procured an Act of Parliament Rot. Parl. 1 H. 7. That the Inhaeritance of the Crown of the Realms of England and France, with all the Preheminencies and Dignities Royal to the same apperteining, and the Ligeances to the King belonging beyond the Seas, &c. shall be, rest, remain, and abide [Page 32] in the most Royal Person of our most Sovereign. Lord Henry the Se­venth, and in the Heirs of his Body lawfully coming, perpetually, and so to endure, and no otherwise.

It may be noted from these words, That the inheritance of the Crown should rest, remain, and abide, in the King, &c. That he designed not a Declaration or Recognition of his Right, but rather an Establishment of that Possession he had gotten by the Sword; for not thinking this Act a Sufficient Security for him, nor depending on this Parliamentary Title, he extended his pretences beyond this Establish­ment, in at much as he procured it to be confirmed the year follow­ing by the Bull of Pope Innocent the Eighth, in which this Statute, with his Titles of Couquest, and Descent, are mentioned, and confirmed.

In Cotton. 1. Libr. Cleopat. E. 3. The Bull says, That the Kingdom of England belonged to him by undubitable right. Non modo jure Belli, ac notorio & indubitato pro­ximo successions Titulo, verum etiam omnium prelatorum; procerum, Magnatum Nobilium totiusque ejusdem Regni Angliae plebis Electione, et noto ac decreto statuto et ordinatione ipsius Angliae Regni trium Sta­tuum in ipsorum conventu Parliamento nuncupato:

That is, Not only by the right of War, and the notorious and indu­bitable next It is true, if [...] in right of his Queen. And note, He prefers his Ti­tle by Conquest and Succession, before that by Ad of Parlia­ment. Title of Succession, but also by the election of all the Pre­lates, and great Men, and of the whole Commonalty of the Kingdom of England, and by a known and decreed Statute and Ordinance of the Three Estates of the same Kingdom of England, their meeting call­ed a Parliament.

And afterward in the Thirteenth of his Reign he got his Bull renewed and the Act confirmed again by Ibidem. Pope Alexander the Sixth, under pain of Excommunication and Curse to such as should upon any pretence whatsoever, disturb the peace of the Nation, and create trouble against this Title of Henry the Seventh.

So that notwithstanding this Act of Parliament, which was cun­ningly penned to Establish his possession he had obtained by the sword, He thought that, and the Popes Bulls of Confirmation his best Title, yet not omitting his own pretended indubitable next Right of Succession.

Henry the Eighth, next heir to the Crown by Proximity of Blood, as right Heir to his Mother Elizabeth, Daughter and right Heir to Edward the Fourth, succeeded his Father in his Kingdom; who in all Extravagant Acts concerning his Queens and the Succession, ever found­ed it in pretended legal Proximity of Blood, and Lawful next Heirs of Blood according to the due course of inheritance; the pretended want of which, was the only suggestion for passing these Acts.

In the Twenty fifth of Henry the Eighth there was an Act for the Succession; Cap. 22. the preamble this. In their most humble wyse shewen unto your Majesty your most humble and obedient Subjects the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in this present Parliament, &c. That since it is the natural inclination of every man to provide for the suerty both of his Title and Succession, although it touch his only private Cause; we therefore reckon our selves much more bounden to beseech and instant your I lighness to forsee and provide for the perfect suerty of both you, and your lawful Succession, and Heirs, upon which dependeth all our joy, and wealth, in whom also is united and knit the only meer [...] the [...] and H [...]ir of [...] Houses of York and Lancaster. TRUE INHERITANCE, [Page 33] and TITLE of this Realm without any contradiction. And then men­tions, that certain divisions arose upon ambiguities; and doubts not perfectly declared from froward intents, to expound them contrary to the right legalty of the Lawful Succession, and posterity of the lawful Kings and Emperours of this Land.

After this confirming the Divorce of Queen Katherine, as also the King's Marriage with Anne Boleyn, the Parliament entayles the Crown upon him and his Heirs Male by her, and for want of such Issue upon Elizabeth their eldest Daughter, and their Heirs Females according to the due course of Inheritance.

From whence it appears that the Succession was founded upon in­heritance, and the design of the Act was that Henry the eighth might have Lawful Issue to inherit the Crown, that so all Ambiguities, and Doubts about the Succession might be taken off. And all the Kings Subjects were bound under pain of misprision of Treason to swear to observe the Contents of this Act.

The Act for Succession, 28 Hen. 8. c. 7. affirms there were many Law­ful impediments, unknown at the making of the Act of Succession, 25 Hen. 8. c. 22. which since that time were confessed by the Lady Anno before The­mas Archbishop of Canterbury sitting Judicially for the same: Pult. Stat. f. 628. 630. Ibid. [...]. 633 By reason of which impediments, the Kings Marriage with her was never good, nor consonant to the Lawes; and therefore Q. Elizabeth was declared Il­legitimate, and it was declared Treason for any Man to judge or believe the Marriage between the King and the Lady Katherine, or Anne, to be good, Ibidem. lawful, or of any effect. It was also in this Act declared Treason for any one to take, accept, name, or call any of the Children born and procreate under those unlawful Marriages, Ibis. f. 631. legitimate, or lawful Children of the King. And therefore the Crown was settled upon the King and his Heirs Males by his Lawful Queen Jane; and for want of such Issue by her, upon his Heirs Males by any other Lawsul Wife; and for want of Heirs Males, Ibid. f. 632. upon his Heirs Females by Queen Jane, or any other Lawful wise. And for lack of Lawful Heirs of his Body to be procreated and begotten as is limitted by this Act, to such person and persons in Possession and Remainder, as should please the King; and according to such Estate, and after such manner, Ibidem. form, fashion, order, and condition, as shall be expressed, declared, named, and limitted by his Letters Parents, or by his last Will. And then follows, And we your most humble and obedient Subjects do faithfully promise to your Majesty by one Common Assent, That after your decease, and for lack of Heirs of your Body lawfully begot­ten as is afore rehearsed, We, our Heirs and Successors, shall accept and take, love, dread, serve, and alonely obey, such Person and Per­sons Males or Females, as your Majesty shall give your said Imperial Crown unto, by authority of this Act, and to none other; and wholly to stick to them as true and faithful subjects ought to do to their Regal Rulers, Governours and supream Heads.

To provide for Lawful Heirs was the pretended Ground of this Act of succession; not to exclude them, and to give the King a strange unheard of Power to dispose of the crown. &c.

The Thirty fifth of Henry the Eighth, cap. 1. recites how the Crown was entailed, 28. Hen. 8. and what Power was given to him to dispose of [Page 34] the Crown. To the intent therefore that His Majesty's disposition and mind therein might be openly declared, and manifestly known, His Maje­sty designing a Voyage beyond Sea; it was enacted by his Highness, with the Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons in Parliament assembled, and by Authority of the same, That in case it should happen, the King's Majesty, and Prince Edward, Heir Appa­rent, to die without Issue of their Bodies lawfully begotten, so as there be no Heirs Male or Female of either of their Bodies to have and inhe­rit the said Imperial Crown, that then it should be to his Daughter Ma­ry, and her Heirs lawfully to be begotten under such Conditions as should be limited by the King's Letters Patents, or his last Will: And for default of Issue, to his Daughter Elizabeth upon the same Conditions. But if no Con­ditions were appointed, then the Succession to each of them, one after another, abosolutely.

And for want of Heirs by his Queen Katherine, his Lawful Wife; and for want of Lawful Issue or Prince Edward, his Daughters Mary and Elizabeth, then the King to dispose of the Crown at his only plea­sure from time to time.

All these Acts of Succession were made by the King's Sollicitation, Au­thority, Command, or other Procurement; and were not other wife mo­ved, contrived or offered to him.

In the First of Queen Mary there is an Act, 1 Mar. Session. 2.c. 1. declaring the Queen's Highness to have been born in most just and faithful Matrimony; and also repealing all Acts of Parliaments and Sentence of Divorce made or had to the contrary. The intention of this Act was to declare the Suc­cession to be in Inheritance by Right of Blood.

In the First of Elizabeth, Eliz. c.3. the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons do declare and confess th t Queen Elizabeth, and in very deed, and of most meer Right, ought to be, by the Laws of God, and the Laws and Statutes of this Realm, their most rightful and lawful Sovereign Queen: And that she was rightly, and lineally, and lawfully descended and come of the Blood-Royal of this Realm of England; in and to whose Princely Per­son, and the Heirs of her Body lawfully begotten after her, without all Doubt, Ambiguity, Scruple or Question, The Imperial Crown and Dignity of this Realm was rally and entirely vested. In this Law (whether it were true or not in her) the right, lineal and lawful Descent of Queen Eli­zabeth was the Ground upon which she was declared to be by God's Laws, and the Laws and Statutes of this Realm, most rightful and lawful Queen.

And whatever she and her Council secretly thought of her own Per­sonal Title. Yet upon the Treaty or Marriage with the Duke of Anjon, in the Answer to the sixth Article delivered by the French Ambassador, it is declared, that the Succession in her Kingdoms was, and ought to be Hereditary, according to nearness in Blood. The words are Liberi ex hoc matrimonio prognati in materna haereditate succedent in regnis, se­cundum jura & consuetudines regnorum, viz. primogenitus filius in Coronam quam Regina mater habet, & si nulli extabunt filii Masculi, filioe si exta­bunt, viz, prima & sola maxima natu, &c. Atque idem ut fiat in hoere­ditate paterna loequum est, & quomodo consuetudines locorum id ferent, in­telligi parest. That is, The Children begotten of this Marriage shall [Page 35] succeed in the Mothers Inheritance in the Kingdoms, according to the Laws and Customs of the Kingdoms; that is to say, The First born Son shall enjoy the Crown which the Queen Mother hath: And if there be no Issue Male, the Daughters, if there be any, shall succeed that is to say, the Eldest first, and alone, &c. And that it is just the Suc­cession should obtain after the same manner in the Paternal Inheritance, if the Custom of the places would allow it.

After the death of Queen Elizabeth, the Act of Recognition, made Up­on King James his coming to the Crown, doth not take notice of the Title raised by Act of Parliament to Henry the Seventh, and the Heirs of his Body: But declares 1 Jac. c. 1. that he was Lineally, Rightfully and Lawfully descended of the Body of the most excellent Lady Margaret, eldest Daughter of this most renowned King Henry the Seventh, and the high and noble Prin­ress, Queen Elizabeth, his Wife, eldest Daughter of King Edward the Fourth. The said Lady Margaret being eldest Sister of King Henry the Eighth, Father of the High and Mighty Princess of famous Memory, Elizabeth, late Queen of England: Ibibem. In consideration whereof, the Parliament doth acknowledge King James their only Lawful and Rightful Leige Lord and Sovereign, Ibidem. And further say, as being bound thereunto both by the Laws of God and Man, they do recognize and acknowledge Ibidem. that Immediately upon the Dissolution and Deceasy of Elizabeth, late Queen of England, the Imperial Crown of the Realm of England, and all the King­doms, Dominions and Rights belonging to the same, did by inherent Birth­right, and lawful and undoubted Succession, descend and come to His most excellent Majesty, as being lineally, justly and lawfully next, and SOLE HEIR of the Blood-Royal of this Realm, as it is afore said. And thereun­to they do most humbly and faithfully submit and oblige themselves, their Heirs and Posterities for ever, until the last drop of their Bloods be spent.

What can be clearer than that the Succession to the Crown of England was always thought, judged, had, taken and reputed to be from Next­ness of Blood, by the Opinion of all sober Men, by Law and Custom, by this, and other Acts of Parliament, and Statutes before cited.

This then being the true History and Case of Succession to the Crown of England, and its being only founded upon Proximity of Blood, the Author of the Brief History of Succession, &c. ought to have called it An History of Vsurpations, Seditions and Rebellions. It was written and intended for a purpose he will not own; that is, to shew, that In the English Monarchy there is not Right of Succession; but that Parliaments or Armies may set up whom they please.

This, I confess, hath been practised in this Nation; and it was the main Cause of the War between the Families of Tork and Lancaster; that proceeding from the Right of the one Patty, and Possession of the other, and the Contrarieties of Acts of Parliament was caused by the Alternate Victories of both.

But the doing of a thing makes it not lawful: Repeated Wickedness, or the frequent Repetition of Wiekedness, gives no Authority to any one to commit that Wickedness, as the frequency of Adulteries or Rob­beries doth not justifie either of them.

[Page 36] I think it's no good Argument to say, Edward the Second was de­posed and murthered, therefore Richard the Second might be deposed and murthered; or, That they were both deposed and murthered, therefore Charles the First might be deposed and murthered; or, Because King Charles the First was deposed and murthered, therefore King Charles the Second may be deposed and murthered.

Precedents are of force only in things lawful, obscure or dubious, but never, in things unjust.

The Depositions and Murthers of Edward the Second and Richard the Second, the Usurpations and unlawful Actions of Henry the Fourth and Richard the Third, were in their own times condemned by all good Men, even as the Actions of that Parliament began in 1641. in ours, which I suppose is the reason why the Author of the Pamphlet brings not them in as a Precedent; which would have served his turn better than all his other Instances.

But besides their impious Instances, we ought to take notice of the Expressions of these Men of Jesuitical Principles. They call Usurpation the Election of the People; a Faction, the Commonwealth; the Actions of a few they impute to all; They call Rebellion a just and judicial Proceeding; often and open Perjury, an orderly Revoking of a Sentence; God's secret Judgment in permitting Injustice to prevail, his owning and allowance thereof; the Inconsistency and present Humour of the heedless Multitude, (who judge of things, not by Reason or Justice, but either by Opinion, which commonly is partial; or else by Report, which is usually full of Incertainties and Errors, the most part Doing because others Do; all ea­sie to be drawn in to serve any wicked and ambitious Men's Attempts) they call the presumed Will and Consent of the People: According to which (say they) the Succession of the Crown is to be directed. And by these Arts they do very much impose upon their unwary Readers.

To this History of Succession belongs the Act of the Thirteenth of Elizabeth, cap. 1. intituled An Act whereby certain Offences are made Treason; which, as many great and learned Persons think, was, upon the debate and making of it, intended and designed to declare a Power in the Queen and her Successors for ever, by Authority of Parliament, to make Laws and Statutes of sufficient force and validity, to limit and bind the Crown of England, and the Descent, Limitation, Inheritance and Government thereof.

Sir Edward Coke 4 Instit. f 52. says, Many Acts of Parliament are hardly to be understood, unless the History of that time be joyned thereunto. This Par­liament met Pult. Stat. April 2. 1571. 13 Eliz. and was dissolved Com. Jo [...]a. mar. 29 Maii. fol. 39. May 29. following.

This Parliament, we see, was holden in the beginning of the Year 1571. Some Years before, but most especially in the Year1570. im­mediately preceding, Sei Camden's Eliz. An. Dom. 1568, 1569, 1570, 1571. there had been many Practices, and Seditious and Treasonable Contrivances against Queen Elizabeth, by Foreign, as well as Domestick Enemies: By the Pope and King of Spain, Duke of Guise in France, Duke D'Alva in the Netherlands, the Fugitive English, &c. abroad: And at home, frequent Conspiracies to deliver the Queen of Scots out of Prison, Attempts upon the Queen's Person, the Rebellion in the North by the Earls of Northumberland and Westmerland, the Match [Page 37] of the Duke of Norfolk with the Queen of Scots; Ibid. fol. 171. her Usurpation of the Crown of England, with the Title and Arms thereof; and the Bull of Pope Pius the Fifth, by which he declared her a Heretick, &c. and impiously, and without any Authority, other than Papal Tyranny; deprived her of her Title, Dominions and Kingdoms, and absolved all her Subjects from their Obedience and Allegiance.

All these, but Ibid. 149. more particularly the Pope's Bull, and the Con­spiracy of Norfolk, created much trouble in the mind of Queen Eliza­beth: And she sent to the Queen of Scots, Cecyl and Sir Walter Mild­may, to consult with her by what means most conveniently the Dis­sentions of Scotland might be compounded, her self restored, and Queen Elizabeth, and her young Son, safe and secure.

Amongst the Propositions made to obtain these ends, these were two, Ibid. f. 1570. That the Queen of Scots should renounce her Title and Claim as long as Queen Elizabeth, and the Children lawfully born of her Body should live. That if the Queen of Scots should attempt any thing by her self, or any other, against Queen Elizabeth, she should, ipso facto, forfeit all her Right and Title she claimed to England.

To which the Deputies of the Queen of Scots Lieutenants answered, That the Title should be renounced as long as Queen Elizabeth lived: And That the Queen of Scots should be excluded from all Right of Succession in England if she attempted any thing against the Queen of England' s Right, so as if the Queen of England would be likewise bound in some equivalent Pe­nalty if she should attempt any thing against the Queen of Scots.

There was no Agreement upon these, and other Propositions then made, because the Scots-Deputies thought thorn too hard and severe, and not to be assented unto without the greatest Inconveniencies imaginable.

And thence followed new Designs and Contrivances for the Relief of the Queen of Scots, &c.

The Marriage of the Duke of Norfolk with the Queen of Scots was first propounded Ibid. f. 118. by her great Enemy, the Regent Murray; and afterwards carried on by the Earls of Ibid. f. 126, 127. Arundel, Northumberland, Westmerland, Sussex, Pembroke and Southampton, with many Barons, and by the Earl of Leicester himself; who, with his own hand Ibid. f. 128. drew up Articles which he sent to the Queen of Scots, in number six; two whereof were, That she should do nothing which might be prejudicial to the Queen of England, or to the Children born of her, in the Succession of the Kingdom of England. That she should revoke her Assignment of the King­dom of England to the Duke of Anjou. The occasion of this Article was, Ibid. f. 118. that Murray had reported that the Queen of Scots had made over her Title to England to the Duke of Anjou, and that her Conveyance was confirmed at Rome: which the Queen utterly denied. And it was af­terwards discovered to be an invention of Murray's to alienate Queen Elizabeths mind from her.

To obviate all these Mischiefs and Designs; The Queen and her private Ministers, the Earl of Leicester, Lord Burleigh and Sir Francis Walsing­ham thought fit to improve the insinuation and Overture of a Match Ibid. f. 107. made by the Queen Mother of France, but not very vigorously pursued untill the Year 1571. 13 Eliz. and in the time of the Sitting of the [Page 38] Parliament of that Year, though 'twas not in that Assembly or their Journals taken notice of, it being Compleat Ambassador, Queens Let­ter, f. 66. Burleigh's Letter, f. 69. Queens Let­ter, f. 83. & Qu. Let. f. 106. secretly managed by order of the Queen, by her two then great Confidents, the Earl of Leycester, and the Lord Burleigh, by the Mediation of Sir Francis Walsingham, then Embassador in France. Whether Leycester meant honestly and serious­ly in this Affair, I cannot determine; Ib. f. 105, 108. June 7. 1571. Ibid. f. 96. he made great Professions that he did; the then Posture of Affairs being represented to him by Wal­singham, in a Letter dated from Paris, May 14. 1571. in these Words.

How necessary this Match was at this time for the safety of the Queen and Nation, we have the Opinion of this great Statesman and Minister; with whom Leycester and Burleigh concurred in Opinion, as appears by their several Letters relating to these Transactions. And since the French, in the Sixth Article delivered in by the French Am­bassador the Thirteenth of April, 1571. propounded the Succession to be secured to the Issue of this Marriage, according to the Laws and Customs of the Realms; to which Queen Elizabeth, according to the common Opinion of the Understanding Men of those Times, not having Right by Inheritance or Proximity of Blood, might think by this Act of Parliament (that in effect doth grant the general Surmise) to make good her Title, and by this way and means to notifie it to be according to the Laws and Customs of the Realm. For the Duke of Anjou could not but have notice of the pretended Defectiveness of her Claim, though not mentioned in the Treaty; and therefore this might haply be done as much as could be to meet with and satisfie that Objection, if it should be made, and that this might be a private, though none of the great Considerations, of procuring and passing this Act. He that will but observe these Particulars of History, and will take the pains to compare them with this Act, may easily per­ceive it was made as a Provision against such things, pretences, and at­tempts, for the future, during Queen Elizabeths Reign, as had then been done, used, and practised: it being then doubted whether the Laws and Statutes of this Realm then in force, were sufficient for the Pre­servation of the Queens Person.

The Title of the Act is, An Act whereby certain Offences are made Treason. And the Bill in the Commons Sabbati, 21 Apr. 1571. fol. 18. b. Journal was called, A Bill for Treasons.

[Page 39] The Preamble upon the Parliament-Roll is, Forasmuch as it is of some doubted whether the Laws and Statutes of this Realm; remaining at this present in force, are vail­able and sufficient enough for the Surety and Preservati­on of the Queens most Royal Person, in whom consisteth all the Happiness and Comfort of the whole State and Subjects of the Realm, which thing all dutiful, faith­ful, and loving Subjects ought and will with all careful Study and Zeal consider, foresee, and provide for; By the neglecting and passing over whereof with winking Eyes, there might happen to grow the Subversion and Ruine of the Quiet and most happy State and present Government of this Realm, which God defend.

Therefore Rast. Stat. tit. Treasons, n. 27 f. 5 54. a it was Enacted, Declared, and Established, That if any Person or Persons whatsoever, within the Realm or without, should compass, imagine, invent, devise or in­tend the Death or Destruction, or any Bodily harm, tend­ing to Death, Destruction, Maym, or Wounding of the Person of Queen Elizabeth, or to Deprive or Depose her of or from the Stile, Honour, or Kingly Name, &c. or to levy War against her Majestie within the Realm or without, or to move or stir any Forreigners or Strangers with Force to Invade this Realm; or if any Person of Persons whatsoever shall maliciously and advisedly declare and publish, That Queen Elizabeth during her Life is not or ought not to be Queen of England, &c. or, That any other Person or Persons ought of Right to be King or Queen of the said Realm: or, That shall maliciously and advisedly set forth and affirm, That Queen Elizabeth is an Heretick, Schismatick, Tyrant, Infidel, or Vsurper: That then all and every such said Offence and Offences shall be taken, deemed, and declared, by the Authority of this Act and Parliament, to be High Treason.

And be it also Enacted by the Authority aforesaid, Ibid. b. That all and every Person and Persons, of what Degree, Con­dition, Place, Nation, or Estate whatsoever they be, which shall at any time in the Life of Queen Elizabeth, in any wi [...]e claim, pretendi utter, declare affirm or publish them­selves, or any of them, or any other than Queen Elizabeth, to have Right or Title to have and enjoy the Crown of England during or in her Life-time, or shall usurp the same Crown or Royal Style, Title, and Dignity, during or in her Life-time; or shall hold and affirm, That she had not Right to hold and enjoy the said Crown, or shall not (af­ter demand) effectually acknowledge her to be in Right, true and lawful Queen: They and every of them so offend­ing, shall be utterly disabled during their Natural Lives onely, to have or enjoy the Crown or Realm of England, or the Style, Title, or Dignity thereof, at any time in Suc­cession, Inheritance, or otherwise, after the Decease of the [Page 40] Queen, as if such Person were naturally dead: Any Law, Custom, Pretence, or Matter whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding.

And be it further Enacted, Ibid. f. 554 b. That if any Person shall, during the Queens Majesties Life maintain, hold and af­firm any Right in Succession, Inheritance, or Possibility, in or to the Crown or Realm of England, or the Rights thereof to be in any such Claimer, Pretender, Vtterer, Declarer, Affirmer, Vsurper, Publisher, or Not-acknow­ledger, shall be a High Traytor, and suffer and forfeit as in Cases of High Treason.

And for the Confirmation and making good what had in this Law been hitherto Enacted, Ibidem. as much as might be, it was further Enacted, That if any Person should in any wise hold and affirm, This Clause was mainly intend­ed against the pretended Au­thority of the Pope, by which he deposed her. or maintain, That the Common Laws of this Realm not altered by Parliament, ought not to direct the Right of the Crown of England; or, That our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth, with and by Authority of the Parliament of England, is not able to make Laws and Statutes of suf­ficient force and validity to limit and bind the Crown of this Realm, and the Descent, Limitation, Inheritance, and Government thereof; or, That this present Statute, or any part thereof, or any other Statute to be made by the Authority of the Parliament of England, with the Roy­al Assent of the Queen, for Limitting of the Crown, or any Statute, for Recognizing the Right of the said Crown and Realm to be justly and lawfully in the most Royal Person of the Queen, is not, are not, or shall not, or ought not to be for ever of good and sufficient force and validity, to bind, limit, restrain, and govern all Persons, their Rights, and Titles, that in any wise may or might claim any Interest or Possibility in or to the Crown of England, in Possession, Remainder, Inheritance, Successi­on or otherwise howsoever: Every such Person so hold­ing, affirming, or mainteining, during the Life of the Queens Majesty, shall be judged a High Traytor, &c. And every Person so holding affirming and mainteining, after the Decease of the Queen, shall forfeit all his Goods and Chattels.

This Statute was a peculiar Law made for the Preservation of Queen Elizabeths Person and Title and this last Enacting Clause and Paragraph was made to strengthen and confirm the former part of the Statute, which was a Provision and Security against such Pre­tences and Practices as were ennumerated in the preceding Historical Account.

And if we consider how much (if not altogether) her Title to the Crown depended upon Statute-Law, and how Questionable her Birth-right was generally reputed to be, no man can much wonder if for her own advantage and safety, she attributed more to an Act of Parliament [Page 41] than otherwise she would have done. She was necessitated to take this course, to establish her self against the Pretences of the Queen of Scots, when her Birth-right could not do it, it being very doubtful whether she was Legitimate, considering the Proceedings in the Di­vorce of Queen Katherine, Marriage of her Mother, and her Mothers Confession 28 H. 8. c. 7. Pult. Stat. to Archbishop Cranmer, when the Statute was made for the declaring the Marriage null and void between Henry the Eighth and Anne Bolein, by which Statute she was also solemnly Bastardized.

And although Queen Elizabeth, at the entrance upon her Govern­ment was acknowledged to be 1 Eliz. c. 3. rightly, lineally, and lawfully Descended from the Blood Royal of this Realm, Ibidem. which if true, had been a suffici­ent Title, She being then the only remaining Issue of Henry the Eighth; yet her right was recognized as depending upon the Lawes and Statutes of the Realm, and by express mention of and reference to the Thirty fifth of Henry the eighth; by which Statute the Crown was settled upon her, and the Heirs of her Body lawfully begotten; in several places whereof, she is by the King her Father, implicitly reputed and declared illegitimate, and the settlement in that Act is made to her, as not being lawfully begotten, or having right to inherit.

In the first of her Reign before cited, Ibidem. when the Crown was declared to be vested in her, and that Declaration and Recognition, as also the Limita­tion and Declaration of the Succession of the Imperial Crown of this Realm mentioned and conteined in the Act of 35 Hen. 8. were to stand, remain, and be the Law of this Land for ever. Which notwithstanding, when Mary Queen of Scots had claimed the Crown by right of Inheritance, and had spread abroad that Title unto it, and also the Title of the House of Suffolk, and other Titles were whispered up and down; the Act of 35 Hen. 8. or this Act of Recognition, were not thought sufficient to secure the Queen Elizabeth. Then was this Act in the Thirteenth of her Reign made meerly either to create or strengthen her Title, and not to Exclude the Queen of Scots from the SUCCESSION, unless she attempted any thing against her, or laid Claim to the Crown, which was also in its own nature a securing Clause to Queen Eliza­beth: But the great Clause of Security to Queen Elizabeth in this Act, was that Clause by which it was made Treason for any man to affirm that she by Authority of Parliament could not make Lawes and Statutes to bind the Succession of the Crown, or that this Act or other Lawes to be made by the Parliament of England by her Royal assent, for limiting the Crown and recognizing the right to be lawfully and justly in her person, is not, are not, or shall not, or ought not to be for ever, of good and sufficient force. This Clause was levelled against the Opinion, That the Queen of Scots had the best Title; which began to spread, and gain much credit, as well amongst the Nobility as Commons: By all which it is manifest, this whole Act was but Temporary; and therefore we may note, with Pulton, that it expired with Queen Elizabeth; and it was no Act of Exclusion, but a Law only to secure her Person, and to make and confirm unto her a Title, which without Statute-Law was in it self at least doubtful. And the new Clause which was added, That it should be High Treason, during her Life, for any Person to affirm, she by Authority of Parliament had not Power to [Page 42] bind the Crown, and Succession thereof; or, That the Right of the Crown and Realm was not justly and lawfully, in her Royal Person; cannot affect the Title of a lawful Successor by Inheritance, nor be brought or made use of as a Precedent to exclude him from, the Suc­cession.

But it may be said, There is a great Forfeiture inflicted upon every Person holding and affirming, after her Decease, That Queen Elizabeth and a Parliament could not limit the Succession, and fix the Crown upon her own Head.

This Clause could take no effect after her death, and therefore was added to preserve her Memory from being defamed after her Death, or slanderously charged with the hainous Crime of Ʋsurping the Crown, which in must have been the inevitabble Consequence of affirming she and her Parliament could not limit the Succession.

For she valued much her Credit and Reputation, and would seem to maintain still, that he acted nothing against the Queen of Scots; and therefore the Law is made in general Words, against every Person or Persons whatsoever, of what Degree, Place, Nation, or Condition whatsoever, that should affirm she was not in Right true and lawful Queen, or that should claim the Crown, &c.

In the Point of Succession she could never be brought expresly by Name to exclude the Queen of Scots, or name any other Successor, as is clear from these several Passages in Camden.

Dudley desirous by all means to oblige and obtain the Favour of the Queen of Scots, Camd. Eliz. f. 73. A. D. 1564. accused the Lord Keeper Bacon to the Queen, That he had intermedled against the Queen of Scots in the matter of Successi­on; for which he lost the Queens Favour, and was with much ado at last restored to it again by the Mediation of Cecil, Ibidem. upon, which our Author says, Certainly the Queen never heard any thing more unwillingly, than that the Right of Succession should be called in question or disputed.

The same Year Queen Elizabeth hearing of a Match like to be between the Queen of Scots and Henry Lord Darly, Ibid. fol. 75. to prevent it, ad­vertifed her, by her Lieger Randolph, That that Marriage was general­ly so dishked by all the English, that she had Prorogued the Parliament to another time, against the minds of her Council, left the Estates of the Realm being incensed, shou'd even for this cause Enact somewhat against her Right to the Succession. Jus Successio­nis. Which that it might not be done after­wards, she recommended Leycester unto, her for a Husband, whom chiefly for that Reason she had created Earl.

In the Year 1566▪ a Parliament was called to meet on the First of November. Ibid. fol. 83. They began to Debate roundly about the Succession; and the Earls of Pembroke and Leycester, and Duke of Norfolk, thought that an Husband was to be imposed upon the Queen or a Successor publickly de­signed by Act of Parliament, even against her will. Whereupon they were excluded the Presence-Chambcr, and denied Access to the Queen; but they soon submitted themselves to her, and obtained pardon. Ibid.& f. 84. Yet the Upper House did by the Lord Keeper Bacon advise, move, and pray her to Marry, and to appoint a Successor, if she or her Children should die without Issue.

But some in the Lower House handled these things more tumul­tuously. Ibidem. [Page 43] Bell and Monson, great Lawyers, Dutton, Paul, Went worth, and others, who grated upon the Queens Authority too much, and amongst other things maintained, That Kings were bound to design a Successor. At last they offered her far greater Subsidies than they were wont, upon condi­tion that she would design a certain Successor. She absolutely refused that extraordinary Offer, and accepted an ordinary Sum, commending their Affection.

The last day of the Parliament she made a Speech, and gave the busie Men a smooth Reprehension. Ibid. f. 89. I find (saith she) that in this Parliament DISSIMƲLATION hath walked up and down, masked un­der the Vizor of LIBERTY and SƲCCESSION. Some of your Num­ber there are that thought it LIBERTY to dispute of the SƲCCESSI­ON, and that the Establishment of the same is absolutely to be granted or denied. If I had granted it, these Men had had their desire, and had triumphed over me; but if I had denied it, they thought to have moved the Hatred of my People against me, which my greatest Enemies could ne­ver yet do: But their Wisdom was unseasonable, and their Counsels over­hasty, neither did they foresee the Event: Yet hereby I easily perceived who inclined toward me, and who were averse unto me, &c.

Upon this Speech Camden makes this Remarque, Ibidem. Thus a Woman's Wisdom suppressed these Commotions, every day so qualified them, shining clearer and clearer, that very few besides such as were seditious and fear­ful, were troubled about a Successor. And certainly most men, what­ever they pretend, have no more sense of Publick Matters, than what concerns their own Private.

To these Testimonies of the Queens aversion to pass a Bill of Exclu­sion of the Q. of Scots, may be added a very clear and convincing one out of the Journal of the House of Commons, in the Fourteenth of her Reign, after the passing this Act, which is said so much to favour a Bill of Exclusion. Mr. Treasurer of the Houshold, Mercur. 28 Maii. 1572. fol. 53. Sir Francis Knolles, from the Queen, advised the House of Commons to go forwards against the Queen of Scots with a second Bill; and that her Majesty minded not by any Im­plication or drawing of Words, to have the Scotish Queen either inabled or disinabled to or from any manner of Title to the Crown of England; and willed, That the Bill be drawn and penned by her Learned Counsel, before the same be treated of in the House; and that in the mean time of bringing in of that Bill, the House enter not into any Speeches or Argu­ments of that Matter.

With the Journal agrees a Passage in the Lord Burleigh's Letter Compleat Ambassador, fol. 219. to Sir Francis Walsingham the Queens Embassador in France, July 2. 1572. two days after the Parliament was Prorogued.

This Parliament did not meet again until the Eighth of February, in the Eighteenth year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, unless there be any better Authority than Mr. Pulton's, in his Statutes, to make it ap­pear that it did. And although there never was greater fear and dan­ger of the Introduction of Popery and Arbitrary Power, by reason of the Queen of Scots Religion, her Pretences, and Practices, and the ex­pectation of great Assistance from abroad and at home, than at this time, yet we find not those that were suspected to have advised the Queen this great Affair, to have been branded by Publick Vote, as Betray­ers of the Queen, the Protestant Religion, and the Kingdom of England, Promoters of the Scottish Interest, and Pensioners to Scotland.

This is a faithful Relation of the Succession. Whether I have fairly or partially cited the Records and Histories I have used, any Man (if he please) may inform himself. Whether it be expedient, just, or lawful to go about to interrupt the lawful Succession by Birth-right, or to endeavour to break or vacate the Laws and Customs of the Na­tion, by which it is Established and Governed, without any Motion, Sollicitation, Procurement, or Intention of the present true and lawful King by Birth-right, for and upon the Suggestions in the Bill mentioned, I leave to the Consideration of Wiser Men than my self. In smaller Matters than this it was said, Nolumus Leges Angliae mutare.