AN INQUIRY Into the Remarkable Instances of History, and Parliament Records, used by the Author of the unreasonableness of a new Separation on Account of the Oaths; whether they are faithfully cited and applied.  
THE Author of this Discourse makes Enquiry into two things, to clear what he hath before delivered.  

Page 12.  1st. How far the Discharge or Release from a Person, who hath Right, and is concerned, is necessary to those who take the Oaths of Allegiance to another Person in Possession of the Crown.  
2dly, How far our Saviour's Rule holds in this Case.  
The Theological part of this Discourse I wholly pretermit, and leave it to Divines; the Historical is only that I shall inquire into.  
And before I enter upon this Enquiry I shall Note.  
First, That the Saxons were a miscellaneous People, joined with the Francs in Piracy and Rapine; who made Descents wherever they could upon the Coasts of Gallia, Flanders, and Britain, as Ammianus Marcellinus, lib. 27. c. 7. and l. 28 c. 7. Bede in his History fol 58. col. 2. adds the Jutes and Angles to those, who came or were invited into England. Mr. Selden adds to these the Danes and Frisons, in his Chronology at the end of Janus; and most certainly under the names of Saxons were comprehended several other People; such as joined with them in Rapine and Piracy, or such as they had subdued, which by the Conquering Romans, or Neighbour Nations, had been forced for their own safety into Islands, Bogs and Morasses, upon and near the Coasts of the Germane Sea, from the River Eydor in Juteland to the Elve, and from thence to the Rhine and Scheld; and it may not want probability, that the Heptarchy was here erected by the Leaders of seven different sorts of People, Robbers and Pillagers under the names of Saxons. Such as they were when they came, they remained, especially during the Heptarchy, always Invading, Plundering, and Burning one another's Countries, frequently killing and murdering their Kings, Earls, or Chief Governors, or those one another. So, as I think, very Judicious Men would not look for Authentic and Well-grounded Precedents in the History of these times; where things were always in a Flux, without permanent settlement, or amongst the barbarous Usages of these rude, illiterate People; unless in such Cases as may have a great appearance of Truth, and are reported or confirmed by the unanimous consent of their Historians.  
The order of Succession was certain in the West Saxon Kingdom, after Egbert brought the greatest part of the Heptarchy under his Power and Government. Yet from the various Expressions of the ancient Writers of the Saxon Story concerning the Succession, an unwary Reader would think that the Saxons agreed not in one Rule of Succession, or that they had no Rule at all; but whoever considers with understanding, what those Historians say, will find they pursued a sure Rule of Succession (as much, and as often as those times would permit) which was either Right and Proximity of Blood; or the Nomination and Appointment of a Successor by the Precedent King; which Nomination by the Saxon Kings, before the Danes came in, mostly happened in the Minority or Nonage of their Children, and that only in the turbulent State of the Nation, in turbulento Reipublicae tempore, which was thought and allowed a sufficient Cause, for the Father to prefer his Brother's Son before his own, 
Vit. Aelfred. fol. 9 sect. 10. lin. 4. etc.  or a Bastard before his lawful Issue, ut pater fratris filium proprio, vel etiam Nothum anteferret Germano. And by the following Instances it will plainly appear, That the Saxons did in their owning of Subjection and Submission to their Princes, acknowledge both Proximity of Blood, and Nomination by their Kings often both together, sometimes only one of them, but never followed any other Rule, nor did the People in the Saxon Monarchy set up any King themselves in any formal, or pretended Assembly of the Nation. Of both Titles in the same Person, there are these three Examples before the Danes Conquest.  
Egbert the first Saxon Monarch had two Sons, Ethelwolth and Aethelstan; the Eldest succeeded him in the Kingdom of the West Saxons; and he gave to his other Son Aethelstan what he had subdued, or his Conquests; who died obscurely, it not being known what end he came to. 
Malmsb. de Gest. Reg. Ang. f. 20. a. n. 30.  Ethelwolphus West-Saxonum regno contentus, caetera quae pater subjugaverat, Appendicia, Aethelstano filio contradidit, Qui quanto & quo fine defecerit incertum The Saxon Chronology Ann. Dom. 836. hath it thus. Ethelwolphus Occidentalium Saxonum regnum capessit, (Feng to Weg-Sexana Rice, the Common expression for Succession in that Language) filio autem suo Aethelstano, Cantuariorum, Saxonum Orientalium, Suthregientium, & Such Saxonum regnum donavit. Florence of Worcester in the same year thus. Cujus post mortem (meaning Egbert) Ethelulphus filius suus in West-Saxonia regnare coepit, suumque filium Aethelstanum Cantuariis, East-Saxonibus, Suth-Regiis, & Suth-Saxonibus regem perfecit. Egbert made his Son Aethelstan King of Essex, Kent, Surrey, and Sussex. After whose death the whole Kingdom came into the hands of Aethelwulph. 
* Testam. Aelfred. in Asser. Meneven. f 22. n. 20. Malm. f. 22. a. n. 20. b. n. 30. chron. Saxon. Anno 854.  Aethelwulph notwithstanding his Sons by Proximity of Blood were his Heirs, and also Heirs to one another; yet gave his Kingdom of the West Saxons to Ethelbald his Eldest Son, Ethelred his third, Aelfred his fourth Son successively; and gave to his second Son Ethelbert, Essex, Kent, Surry, Sussex. Ethelhald lived but five years, and Aethelbert succeeded him in the whole Kingdom as next Brother,  justum erat, says Asser. f. 4. n. 40. Flor. Worcest. and Simon of Durham Anno. 860. 
† Chon. Saxon. Anno. 860.  Aethelbaldus autem Quinquennium regnabat (Feng Aethelbryht, to Eallum Tham Rice his Brother) Ethelbertus autem totum fratris sui regnum capessit. 
* Flor. Wigo●n. Anno. 866, 871.  After whom his two younger Brothers Aethel●ed, and Aelfred were possessed of the Kingdom successively. This Historian calls this Testament or Will Epistola haereditaria.  

† Id. Anno. 975.  So King Edward possessed the Kingdom after his Father King Edgar, both by Proximity of Blood, as his Eldest Son; and by his Father's Donation, and Command, & Edwardum, ut pater ejus praeceperat, eligerunt, etc. Flor. Wig. Anno. 975.  
From Egbert the First Saxon Monarch, to Ethelred the last Saxon King, by Proximity and right of Blood, for the space of 216 years, we do not often find the words Elected, or Election; and where they do occur, they are bound and limited by Proximity of Blood, or Nomination of the Successor by the Predecessor: and as they are used, they signify only Recognition of, or Submission to him, that was said to be Elected.  
Secondly, The Danes (a promiscuous People as the Saxons were, Danes, Norwegians, Goths, Sweves, Frisons, etc. and under the name of Danes 
† Aelfred vit. f. 10. c. 14. ) ever since the beginning of King Egbert, having by continued Invasions, and Piracies, harassed, and grievously wasted and molested England, in the Reign of King Aelfred, by pact and bargain between him and Guthran, enjoyed East Saxony, or Essex, and the County of the East Angles; and, as 
* Faedus Aelfr. & Guthr. c. 1. Lamb. fol 36.  some say, a far greater part of the Nation. In King Ethelred's Reign, Swain, King of Denmark, with a great Army Invaded, and made himself Master of the whole Nation; forcing Ethelred and his Wife Emme, Sister to Richard the Second Duke of Normandy, with their two Sons Edward and Alfred into that Country.  
The Danish Kings stayed not long here after Swain had conquered the Kingdom; they all four Reigned not much above 25 years, their only Title was the Sword; notwithstanding they either brought hither the custom of the Predecessors naming, or giving the Kingdom to his Successor, as probably it might have been some times practised in their own Kingdoms; or used it as they found it here practised in cases of Necessity, and in their children's Minority by the Saxon Kings.  

† Encomium Emmae pr. by du Chesn amongst the old French Histor. fol. 164. B.  Swain made his Son Cnute his Successor. He married Emme the Widow of Ethelred, by whom he had his Son Hard Cnute. To him his half Brother Cnute gave all that had been any ways under his Government; but he being then in Denmark, 
* Ibid. C.  Harold possessed himself of the Kingdom; who was a Bastard Son of a Maid Servant brought into his Concubine's Chamber, and imposed upon him by her; 
Fol. 174. A. B.  and for this reason Elnoth Archbishop of Canterbury refused to Consecrate him King, and to deliver him the Crown and Sceptre.  
After the death of Harold, Hard Cnute called his half Brother Edward by his Mother Emme (afterward called the Confessor) out of Normandy, and caused him to live with him; and dying within less than two years after, left him Heir of his whole Kingdom, 
Gul. Gemeticens. l. 6. c. 9  Totius regni reliquit haeredem.  
And he, not long before he died, made William the Conqueror his Successor. Anno eodem (viz. 1065. 
Note the Reason. ) Rex Edwardus senio gravatus cernens Clitonis Edwardi nuper defuncti filium Edgarum, Regio folio minus idoneum, tam cord, quam corpore, Godwinique Comitis multam malamque sobolem, Quotidie super terram crescere ad Cognatum suum Wilhelmum Comitem Normanniae animum apposuit, & eum sibi succedere in regnum Angliae voce flabili sancivit. In the same year King Edward growing infirm with Age, perceiving Edgar Aetheling, the Son of Prince Edward, lately Deceased, neither in Mind nor Body fit for the Government, nor to bear up against the growing Power and Malice of Godwin's Sons, thought upon his Cousin William Earl of Normandy, 
Fol. 511. b. n. 30.  and by a firm Declaration Decreed he should be his Successor in the Kingdom. Ingulph that Reports this, was at the very time Secretaty to this William Earl of Normandy, and after he had given him a great Character for his Courage, Conduct, and constant success in War; his Justice, Religion, and Devotion, subjoins, that King Edward sent Robert Archbishop of Canterbury, as Envoy to him, to let him know he was designed his Successor in his Kingdom. Which probably he would never have done, if this and the like Donations had been questioned in those days. Nay 
† Review of Tyrhs, p. 482.  Mr. Selden says, This Donation was a lawful Title.  
William Rufus had the same Right and Title of Succession by the Donation of his Father, and as his Testamentary Heir 
* Fragmt. de vitâ Gul. long. f. 32. n. 20. 30. 40. Orde. Vit. f. 39 C. D. .  
Ralph de Diceto, Dean of St. Paul's, (who lived in or very near the time) says, 
† Col. 505. n. 40. 50.  That Hugh Bigod, Steward of the King, made speed out of Normandy, (where King Henry died) into England, and made Oath before the Archbishop of Canterbury, That upon his Death bed, upon some Differences that happened between him and his Daughter the Empress did disinherit her, and made Stephen Earl of Boloign his Heir. Whereupon William Archbishop of Canterbury giving too much credit to the Words of the Steward, consecrated Stephen Earl of Mortaign King at Westminster. If this should be true, he succeeded as Testamentary Heir to King Henry.  
King John was Testamentary Heir to his Brother Richard; who upon his Deathbed, when he despaired of Life, 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. 
* f. 449. b. lin. 37. Walls. Hypodig. Neustriae f. 457. n. 40.  Roger Hoveden, who was a Domestic in the Family of King Henry II. and wrote at this very time, delivers this.  
King John, before he left the World, made Henry his First-begotten Son his Heir. Paris, who 
* f. 288. lin. 2. Mat. West. f. 276. n. 40.  writes this, was Historian to this Henry.  
After what hath been premised, the Author's History comes to be considered upon his first Query, which he maintains upon Instances in the Saxon, Norman, and subsequent times.  

The Author's Words, P. 13.  As to the former, I say, the resolution of Conscience in this case doth not depend upon the Will and Pleasure of the Person to whom the former Oath was made, but upon the ground on which it was made, and from which it had its force to oblige; and if those cease, the obligation of the Oath ceases together with them: And whether they do or not, no particular Person is so fit to judge, as the Three Estates of the Realm, as I shall now prove from several remarkable Instances to this purpose in our Histories and Parliament Records; whereby I shall make it appear, that when a Dispute hath happened about the Right of Succession, and to whom the Oaths of Allegiance were to be made, they have looked on it as their proper Right to limit the Succession, and determine the Oaths. 

The Author's Words, and Application continued ibid. p. 13.  V; nder the British Government, we find a considerable Instance to our purpose, Vortigern, 
A.G. 454. Magnates Brit. Regem Vortigernum penitus deserentes, unanimiter filium suum in Regem sublimaverunt Mat. West. p. 83.  the British King had entered into a Secret League to bring over the Saxons: upon which the Great Men of the Nation deserted him, and chose Vortimer in his room (he was his eldest Son.) Here it is plain, they thought the introducing a Foreign Power, a sufficient discharge of their Obligation to him, it being so directly contrary to the public Good of the Nation, although Vortigern gave them no Discharge. 
In the Desertion of Vortigern and advancing his Son Vortimer, he citys Mat. West. Anno Domini 454. But in the whole Story there is not one Syllable of a Secret League in Mat. West. in that, or in any other following Year. What he citys in the Margin is in Mat. West.   

HISTORY.  
To prevent the Easiness, Supinity, Luxury and Effeminacy of all People; the Ignorance, Avarice, Debauchery, and Simony of the Clergy; and an universal lapse of the Nobility and People into notorious Extravagancies and Impieties; and to repel the Violences, and hinder the Incursions and Invasions of the Picts and Scots; Vortigern held a Counsel of his Great Men and Nobles, being excited thereto by the Noise and Clamours of the People; wherein, by General consent, it was agreed to call the Saxons out of Germany to their aid. Who no sooner received the Invitations from the Britain's by special Messengers, but easily granted, what they themselves had a Thousand 
* Gildas. pag. 46, 47, 48, 49.  times wished for. Vortigern excited by the noysiness of his People about the Public State, asked the Advice of his Great Men; and it pleased them all to call the English, and Saxons out of Germany, Mighty in Arms, Vagabonds, without Habitations, with prospect of a double Profit, that they might easily conquer their Enemies; and that hitherto, being void of Habitations, they might esteem it a vast benefit to inhabit a nasty Soil, or Poor Country: But they were not to attempt any thing against the Britain's, because the memory of the Advantage they received by coming thither, would soften, and reduce their natural Freity or Barbarity. The Advice was allowed, and there were sent into Germany Envoys, very considerable Men, and such as worthily represented the Nation. The Germans hearing what they had a Thousand times wished for 
* Malms. fol. 3. b. n. 10.20. , etc. they entered at first with great Joy 
† Ibid. n. 40. 50.  and Favour of the People: but finding they cheated them, and came for their Estates, when it was too late they would have 
* Ibid. f. 4. a. n. 20.  expelled them. They leagued with the Scots, whom they were sent for to expel, pretending they were not sufficiently rewarded, and provided for, etc. and with their Assistance wasted, , and spoiled all Cities and Countries from the East to the West Sea 
† Gilled c. 24. p. 55, 56. .  
Part of the Story cited by this Author, though he mentions only Mat West. is from Geofry of 
* Fol. 48. b.  Monmouth, the most Fabulous Historian (if he be worthy to be called so) extant amongst the English; and therefore, it may be supposed, this Tale is brought in by a side Wind, and fathered upon Mat. West.  
Lues acerrima, & acrior mox hostium novorum, i. e. Anglorum est secuta, 
Flor. Wigorn. f. 541. Ann. Dom. 446.  Quos Britanni unanimi consilio cum Rege suo Vortigerio, quasi Defensores Patriae, ad se invitandos eligerunt, sed statim Impugnatores & Expugnatores senserunt. A more sharp, than the sharpest of Plagues followed, which was of the new Enemies, the English, whom the Britain's, by Unanimous Counsel and Advice with their King Vortigern, had chosen to be invited to them, as Defenders of the Country, but they presently proved Assaulters of it, and Conquerors. The Saxon Chronology speaks to the same purpose. 
* Anno. 446, 447  And the late Dean of St. Paul's agrees with, and approves of these Relations of the Britain's joining with their King Vortigern, in calling in the Saxons, in his learned Book of the Antiquities of the British Churches. 
Pag. 304. 317, 318     

The Author's Words, ibid. p. 13.  
In the Saxon times Sigebert King of the West Saxons (in the time of the Heptarchy) was complained of for misgovernment, and for changing their Laws for his own ends: but when he persisted in his way, there was a Convention of the Nobility and People (convenerunt Nobiles regni cum populo universo, saith Mat. West.) and they declared themselves free from Allegiance to him, and chose Kineulfus in his room 
* Cum autem modi● omnibus male tractaret eos legesque a tecessorum suorum propter co●modum suum vel d● pravaret, vel mutaret. Mat. West. A. 〈◊〉 756. He Hunt. l. ● p. 196. . The following words here omitted in both Authors are, Kineulfus. Juvenis egregius de Regiâ stirpe oriundus, electus est in Regem.  

HISTORY.  
Both Hen. of Hunt, and from him Mat. West. have this Story. But 'tis otherwise reported, and by Florence of Worcester 
† Fol. 57 An. Dom 755. . Kineulfus de Prosapiâ Regis Cerdicii oriundus; auxilium sibi ferentibus West-Saxonicis Primatibus, Regem illorum Sigebertum ob multitudinem suorum factorum iniquorum regno exterminavit, & loco ejus regnavit. Kineulphus of the Stock of Cerdic, (who was the first Saxon King) by the assistance of the West Saxon Noblemen, for the multitude of his wicked Actions (that was Kineulf's pretence, and without doubt a Common Good tacked to it) expelled Sigebert the Kingdom (except out of Hampshire) and he reigned in his stead. Almost the same relation is in the Saxon Annals. Kineulfus, West-Saxonum primatibus adjutus Sigeberti regnum pro malefactis suis totum quidem, exceptâ Hamtonensium provinia, occupavit. Kineulf, by the help of the West Saxon Nobility, usurped or possessed himself of Sigebert's whole Kingdom for his misdeeds, except Hampshire 
* Saxon. Chron. A. D. 755. . Whence Kineulf is also derived from Cerdic, the Founder of the West Saxon Kingdom. This was in the time of the Heptarchy, when the petty Kings, Earls, and Pretenders to his Government, took all Opportunities and Pretences to destroy and overturn one another. And it was the Action and Contrivance of Kineulf, assisted by the rebellious and mutinous Subjects of Sigebert, that thrust him out of his Kingdom. Malmsbury hath it thus, Arripuit regnum Sigebertus, vir apud suos saevitiâ immanis, idemque foris ignavia perinfamis; quocirca omnium odio conspirante, post annum Solio deturbatus, meliori locum fecit. 
† l. 1. fol. 7. ●. n. 20.30.  Suscepit regni gubernacula Kienulphus, clarus & ille quidem morum compositione, militiaeque gestis. Sigebert invaded, or seized the Throne, a man very cruel at home, and abroad very infamous for Sloth and Cowardice: wherefore he was hated of all Men, and after one Year being dethroned, made way for a better. Kineulf, famous for his good Temper and Military Actions, undertook the Government. In these three most Authentic and Ancient Histories there is nothing of a Convention of the Nobles and People, or an Election of Kineulf, but they affirm, that both he and Sigebert, whom he dethroned, invaded the Government by Force or Fraud, and entered upon it by indirect means; and by such it was to be kept; and for that reason the People hated Sigebert.    

The Author's Words, p. 14.  
In the Kingdom of Mercia, Beornredus for not governing by the Laws, was by a Convention of the Nobility and People set aside from the Government, and Offa chosen King, who was of the Royal Stem, but not the next Heir: and so William of Malmsb. observes, in the West Saxon Kingdom after Ina, That no Lineal Succession was then observed, but still some of the Royal Line sat in the Throne; and of Ina himself, that he was rather put into the Throne for his Virtue, than by his Right of Succession. This Paragraph he makes good by the three parcels of History there noted 

A. D. 758. Gensde regno Merciorum, contra Regem suum Beornredum insurgens, pro eo quod populum non aequis legibus, sed per tyrannidem gubernaret, convenerant in unum omnes, tam Nobiles, quam ignobiles, & Offâ Duce ipsum a regno expulerunt. Mat. West.  
Name & ipse Brithricus & caeteri infra Inam reges, licet Natalium splendore gloriantes (quip qui de Cerdicio originem traherent) non parum tamen a linea regiae Stirpis exorbitaverant Will. Malms. digest. Reg. Ang. l. 1. c. 2.  
Regnum per Inam novatum qui Cinegissi ex fratre Cuthhalbo pronepos magis pro insitivae virtutis industriâ, quam sucessivae sobolis prosapiâ in principatum ascitur. id. ib.  .  
What he says of Beornredus and Offa is to be found in Mat. West. but nothing to that purpose in the Saxon Chronology. All that is there to be found of them as to this particular is in Anno Domini 755. toward the latter end of the Year. Eodem anno Aethelbaldus Rex Merciorum Secan-dunae occissus est; Bearnredus autem regnum capessit, & aliquantisper tenuit. Eodemque anno Rex-Offa regnum suscepit, annosque triginta & novem tenuit. In the Year 755. Ethelbald King of the Mercians was killed at Secandune, and Beornredus possessed the Kingdom, and held it a small time. And the same Year King Offa took the Kingdom, and held it 39 Years. Nor in Florence of Worcester, he only says, Rex Merciorum Aethelbaldus in Segeswald occiditur; cujus regnum Beoruredus tyrannus invasit, & per modicum tempus in paruà letitiâ tenens regnum cum vitâ perdidit; quô mortuô successit in regnum Nepos patruelis Aethelbaldi Regis Merciorum Offa. 
† A. D. 755. f. 574.  Ethelbald King of the Mercians was killed in Segeswald (i e. Secandunt) whose Kingdom Beornred the Tyrant invaded, and holding it a little while with small joy, lost both the Kingdom and his own Life; and Offa the Brother's Son of Aethelbald King of the Mercians succeeded him.  
Malmsbury, speaking of Aethelbald, says, Hic altâ pace, & multo tempore, id est Quadraginta uno Annis rerum perfunctus, & novissimè a Subjectis occisus, fortunae rotam volvit, author ejus necis Bernredus nil memorabile dedit, nisi, quod mox ab Offâ necatus, dignum finem Insidiarum tulit. 
* fol. 14. b. n. 30.  Aethelbald managed his Affairs in a full Peace One and forty Years, but at last the Wheel of Fortune turned, and he was killed by his Subjects; the Author of his Death, Bernred, left nothing memorable behind him, unless his being killed by Offa, and thereby receiving a worthy Reward of his Treachery.  
In these Historians here is nothing of a Convention, that either set aside Beornred, and chose Offa for their King; but only that Beornred was a Tyrant and Traitor, who with his Accomplices murdered his peaceful Sovereign Aethelbald, who in great quiet had governed his Kingdom one and forty years, which he invaded and set up himself, and that Offa revenged his Uncle Aethelbald's Murder, killed Bernred, and succeeded in the Government; and doubtless by the means of the power and force with which he subdued Bernred.  
The other two parcels of History are not fairly cited, or duly placed and laid together; for the Author hath placed that last, which is first mentioned in the Historian; and by these he would prove, That in the West-Saxon Kingdom after Ina no lineal Succession was then observed; and of Ina himself, that he was rather put into the Throne for his Virtue, than by right of Succession.  

HISTORY.  
The words of the Historian are 
* Malms. digest. Reg. l. 1. c. 2. f. 7. a. lin. 6. ; Eo Roman eunte Regnum per Inam novatum, (and so on, as cited by the Author) he going to Rome (that is, King Ceadwalla, concerning whom the preceding Discourse had been) Ina seized upon the Kingdom, or changed the Succession, who was the Grandchild of Cuthbald, Brother of Kinegils, and was called to the government more for his real Virtue, than by successive Birthright.  
The Saxon Chronology 
† A. D. 689.  thus expresseth his coming to the Government; Ine Feng to West-Seaxna Rice, etc. Ina West-Saxonum regnum capescit, Eodem anno Cadwalla Romam Profectus est, Baptismumque à Papa suscepit, Quem Papa Petrum cognominavit, atque circiter Septimanam unam postea defunctus est. Ina took upon him the Government of the West-Saxon Kingdom, etc. Flor. of Worcester thus: 
A. D. 688.  Abeunte Ceadwalla Romam, suscepit Imperium Ina de stirpe Regia; cujus pater Kenredus, cujus pater Ceolwaldus, cujus pater Cutha, cujus pater Cuthwinus, cujus pater Ceanlinus. Ceadwall going to Rome, Ina undertook, or put himself upon the Government, whose Father was Kenred, whose Father was Ceoldwald, whose Father was Cutha, (or according to Malmsb. Cuthbald) whose Father was Cuthwin, whose Father was Ceanlin. In these Histories there is nothing how he ascended the Throne, whether he was called to it, or otherwise placed himself upon it; or received it, as recommended to it by his Predecessor Ceadwald, as he himself when he went to Rome recommended his Successor Aethelhard. Relicto Imperio ac 
* Flor. Wig. A. D. 728. f. 572.  Aethelhardo de prosapiâ Cerdici Regis oriundo, commendato Rex Ina ad limina beatorum Apostolorum profectus est. Ina left his Government, and having recommended Aethelhard, went to Rome. The Saxon Chronology only says, 
† A.D. 728.  Ina Romam abiit, ibique Spiritum efflavit; & Aethelhardus West-Saxonum regnum capessit, tenuitque annos quatuordecim. 
* f. 7. b. n. 20.  Malmsbury's words are; Successit Principatui Aedelardus Inae consanguineus, per quatuordecim annos quietissimè regnum retentum Cuthredo cognato reliquit. Aethelhard the Kinsman of Ina succeeded in the Government, enjoyed it quietly fourteen years, and left it to his Kinsman Cuthred, who held it about the like time. In the Saxon 
† A.D. 741.  Chronology and Flor. of Worcester, 'tis, Cuthred took upon him the Government, or succeeded in the Kingdom.  
The two next Rulers after Cuthred, were Sigebert and Kineulf, of whom before.  
Brithric succeeded Kineulf, but how, and when, none of these three Historians tell us. In his Story we meet with the Author's last parcel of History, but very partially cited. They all report, that he married the Daughter of Offa King of Mercia, at that time most potent, 
† Malms. l. 1. c. 2. f. 8. a. n. 10.  cujus affinitate fultus, Egbertum solum Regalis Prosapiae Superstitem, quem validissimum suis Vtilitatibus metuebat, Obicem Franciam fugandum curavit: nam & ipse Brithricus, & caeteri infra Inam Reges, licet Natalium splendore gloriantes (quip qui de Cerdicio originem traherent) non parum tamen alienâ regiae stirpis exorbitaverant: illo igitur expulso securo resolvi coeperat otio, etc. Supported by the Affinity of Offa, he caused Egbert, the only Survivor of the Royal Race, to fly into France, fearing he would be a great check to his Affairs: for Brithric himself, and the other Kings since Ina, although they might glory in the splendour of their Births (as deriving their Origin from Cerdic) yet they were not a little out of the way from the line of the Royal Progeny: When Egbert was expelled the Kingdom, he began to live securely, etc.  
From this Observation of Malmsbury's, as the Author calls it (if it be one) the lineal Succession before Ina (which might be here set forth, if needful) is as much proved as no lineal Succession after him; and notwithstanding the several Usurpations that had been between the Reign of Ceadwally, or Ina, and Egbert, who was much feared by Brithric, as being the only Survivor, and of right Successor of the Royal Line, and therefore banished into France; the lineal Succession in the West-Saxon Kingdom, was in time revived and continued in the Saxon Monarchy which he founded, as will appear in the further Enquiry into (the Author's) other Saxon Instances. This if it had been fairly cited, could not have been useful to him; but he took what served his turn, and left out the rest.    

The Words of the Author, p. 14.  
Aethelulphus, King of the Westsaxons, went to Rome, 
Matt. West. A. D. 854. 867.  and there crowned Alfred his youngest Son King; and married the King of France's Daughter, in his return, and made her Queen against the Laws; for which reason he was excluded his Kingdom, his eldest Son and Alston Bishop of Shireburn, being at the top of this Act of Exclusion; and he came back only upon the terms of receiving his Son into a Share of the Kingdom; which shows that they looked on the Laws as the measure of Allegiance: and where those were openly broken, that it was in their power to transfer it.  

HISTORY.  
Rex Occidentalium Saxonum Aethelulphus cum honore maximo Romam profectus, etc. Aethelulphus King of the West Saxons went with great honour to Rome, carrying with him his younger Son Alfred, whom he loved beyond all his other Sons, that he might be instructed by Pope Leo in Manners and Religion, where he stayed a year with his Son, and caused him to be crowned King by the Pope; and after few days returning to his Country, he brought with him Judith, Daughter to Charles King of France, whom he had married. But in the mean time, while the King was beyond Sea, there was a Conspiracy of certain great Men form against him; the chief of the Conspiracy were Aethelbald his eldest Son, and Alston Bishop of Shireburn, and Landulph Earl of Somersetshire, who had resolved, that upon his return he should never be received to the Government; for which they had two causes; One, for that he had caused his younger Son Alfred to be crowned at Rome, and postponed and excluded his other Sons; the second was, That he had despised all English Women, and married a Stranger. Moreover, the Conspirators had heard, that contrary to the Custom and Statutes of the West-Saxon Kings, he called the King of France's Daughter, whom he had lately married, Queen; and caused her to sit by him at the Table, and eat with him; which the West Saxon Nation did not permit, nor that she should be called Queen, but the King's Wife. Haec autem infamia ab Eadburga Offae Regis filiâ, ejusdem generis reginâ, exorta est: Quae Virum suum Brithricum ●eneno perdidit, etc. The occasion of which none permission arose from Eadburg the Daughter of Offa, a Queen of the same sort, who destroyed her Husband with Poison, and sitting by the King, was wont to accuse all the Noblemen of the Kingdom; and those she could not accuse, she killed by Poison. Therefore for the lewdness of the Queen, all conspired that they would never permit a King to reign over them, Qui in praedictis culpabilis inveniretur, who should be found culpable in what hath been said. Revertente tandem a Roma Aethelulfo Rege Pacifico, praedictus filius ejus Aethelbaldus, conceptam nequitiam ad effectum producere attentavit; sed Deus omnipotens id fieri non permisit, etc. When the peaceable King Aethelulph returned from Rome, his Son Aethelbald attempted to effect his wicked Contrivance; but God would not permit it: for to prevent a more than Civil War between Father and Son, by the ineffable Clemency of the King, the Confederacy of all the Nobles and Bishops was broken, he dividing the Kingdom of the West Saxons between himself and Son, which before was undivided, so as his Son possessed the East part, and the Father the West part; Et cum tota regni Nobilitas pro Rege decertare, & filium a Jure regni depellere vellent, si Pater id fieri permisisset, ipse mentis nobilitate ab avaritiae sese vitio excludens, filii sui concupiscentiae satisfecit sicque ubi Pater justo Dei judicio regnare debuerat, illic filius pertinax & iniquus regnavit; and when as the whole Nobility of the Kingdom would have fought for the King, and forced his Son from the right of the Kingdom, if his Father would have permitted it to be done; but he being free from all Covetousness, satisfied the unruly Appetite of his Son; and so where the Father ought to have reigned by the just Sentence of God, the obstinate and wicked Son reigned. This Story Mat. Westm. had from Flor. of Worcester 
† A. D. 675. , though it is not in the last altogether so formal. 
* f. 21. b. n. 50. l. 22. a. n. 10. 20.  Malmsbury likewise hath it, though not entirely. But the Saxon Chronology hath nothing of it, nay rather it hath something contrary to it. 
* A. D. 854.  Eodem anno Aethelwulfus rex magno cum honore Romam perrexit, ibique per Menses Duodecim moratus est, cui mox domum redeunti Carolus Francorum Rex filiam suam in Reginam dedit; hinc posteà ad populum suum reversus est, qui mirificè laetabatur: sed post biennium, ex quo a Francis redierat, defunctus est, corpus autem Wintoniae sepultum jacet. In the Year 854. Aethelwulph went in great Pomp to Rome, where he stayed Twelve Months. To whom, as he returned home, Charles King of France gave him his Daughter for his Queen: Afterwards, when he returned to his People they rejoiced wonderfully; within Two Years after he died, and his Body lies buried at Winchester. Not one Word here, or any where else in this Chronology, of this improbable and Romantic Story. But be it true, as it is told in Mat. Westminster, was it against their Laws (i. e. the West Saxon Laws) for Aethelwulph to marry the King of France his Daughter, and make her his Queen? Where is this Law? It is not amongst Ina's Laws. But the Law was made in Brithric's time, by reason of the wickedness of his Queen Eadburgh. If she was as wicked as the Story makes her, was the Anger and Humour of the People against her, sufficient to make a Law, That for the time coming no West Saxon King should permit his Wife to sit and eat with him, or be called Queen? Why was she not put to death for her transcendent Wickedness, if true? Why was she permitted to go into France, with innumerable Treasure after her Husband's death? If there was such a Law made then, 'twas in the time of the Heptarchy. Can any Man think that Egbert the first Saxon Monarch did not suffer his Wife to sit and eat with him, and to be called Queen? And that our Aethelwulph, who had Four Sons by a former Wife, did not permit her to sit and eat with him, and to be called Queen? There was a Conspiracy and wicked Design of Aethelbald to dethrone his Father, carried on by Alston Bishop of Shireburn, and the Earl of Somersetshire, etc. the pretence was, for that he had caused his youngest Son Alfred to be crowned at Rome. What Laws had Aethelwulph broken in this, except the Laws of Birthright, Lineal Descent, and Proximity of Blood? Upon which the Succession of the Monarchy was fixed, if Alstan, Ethelbald, or the Earl of Somersetshire understood any thing of it. Nor could there be any Exclusion of Aethelwulph, when the whole Nobility offered to fight for, and defend him; nor could there be any Terms of receiving his Son into a share of the Kingdom, when out of ineffable Clemency he himself divided it, to avoid a Civil War, and would not suffer the Nobility to force his Son from the Right of the Kingdom. What right was this? Was it not from Proximity of Blood, and Lineal Succession, he being his eldest Son?    

The Author's Words, p. 15.  
If our Allegiance cannot be transferred by the States of the Realm; it must be because, (as some think) by the Fundamental Constitution of this Kingdom, we are bound in Allegiance to the next Right Heir in a Lineal succession. But I find no such thing in the Saxon times; for although they generally kept to the Royal Line, yet not so, but that when it appeared to be much more for the Public Good, they did not stick upon the Point of Proximity.  

What may be opposed to the Words and Assertion of the Author.  
Those, who in these cases our Author, and all others that have written upon this, or the like Subject, do call the States of the Realm, and what is due to the Heir in a Lineal Succession by the Laws of our Land, and consequently by the Constitution of the Kingdom, shall be considered afterwards. Concerning the Saxon Succession, what hath been already said might be sufficient; but upon further occasion given in his Instances, there will be more said of it. The Public Good, which the Author here, and in many other places, seems to rely mainly upon to support what he asserts, is chief to be enquired after.  
Public or Common Good is a common Notion, and signifies nothing unless it be stated, and explained; the true import of the Words are, That every Individual of the common Body, according to the capacity of the Person, should and ought to be made a partaker of the benefit and advantage that ought to accrue to the whole; for if it be such a Good, (or rather such an Evil) as is only for the benefit of a Party, and in respect of the whole, of the least, or a small number; 'tis impossible it should be a Public Good, but a most horrid cheat put upon the People under that pretence, to gull them into Slavery, and to make them the Authors of their own, and the Public Ruin of the Nation. All designing Men of whatsoever Persuasion, though if called together, cannot say what they would have; yet in all Ages have pretended to procure the Public Good of the People. Every Party, (though in the beginning never so inconsiderable) that intends to advance itself, declares for it until it gets Power to manage, and appropriate to themselves what they call so; and than it appears the Interest, Gain, and Advancement of the Party were the End; and the pretence of Common Good, but the Means to that End. And this pretence, and false light, hath at all times so Lowbelled the blind and ignorant World, that Men fly into the Net, though they see all the Laws broken that maintain the Public Good, and the very Foundations of it eradicated; all the goodly Pretences and fair Promises relinquished, and utter desolation coming upon them: And therefore where it is manifest the Public Laws are, or cannot but be broken, contemned, and vilified by any Party, 'tis Private and Party-Good they only intended; and to accomplish their ends, and secure themselves, must proceed against all the Measures and Rules of Public Good, by fraud, force, and violence, accompanied with stupendious Devastation. For nothing can be a Public Good to any Nation, where the exercise and practice of it is not warranted by the Law, Custom and Constitution of that Nation. So that the Author's Argument, upon the account of Common Good, signifies little, unless he can prove the Saxons waved Proximity of Blood; and that they did it according to the Law and Constitution of the Kingdom.    

The Author's words, p. 15.  

Pag. 101. Brompton p. 862. l. 1. c. 3. p. 14.  I shall not meddle with the Kingdom of the Northumber's, which alone was Originally Elective, as appears by Mat. Westm. and wherein there happened so great Disorders and Confusions, that at last William of Malmsb. saith, none could be persuaded to accept of the Kingdom.  

HISTORY.  
Regnum Northanhumbrorum exordium sumpsit. 
M. Westm. A. D. 548. f. 101. n. 20.  Cùm enim Proceres Anglorum magnis laboribus & continuis Patriam illam subjugâssent, Idam juvenem Nobilissimum Regem sibi unanimiter praefecerunt. In the year 548 the Kingdom of the Northumber's first begun. The chief Men, or Leaders of the English, having conquered that Country, unanimously set up Ida, a most noble young Man, for their King. What if the English in the beginning of the Kingdom of the Northumber's did set up Ida (in all probability at that time the great Leader of them) to be their King? Doth it therefore follow that Kingdom was Elective, or that they chose their King afterward? 
A. D. 547  The Saxon Chronology says only, Ida caepit regnare, Vnde Northanhymbrensium Genus Regale ortum est. In the year 547. Ida began to Reign, from whom arose the Royal Race of the Northumber's. 
Eod Anno.  Florence of Worcester says, In provincia Berniciorum Ida regnum suscepit, & 12 annis regnavit; hic ex Reginis sex filios habuit, & sex habuit ex Pellicibus. Ex Quibus Regalis Northanhymbrorum prosapia propagata est. In the Province of Bernicia (part of the Kingdom of Northumberland) Ida took the Kingdom. He had six Sons by his Queens, and as many by his Harlots; from whom the Royal Stock was propagated. Malmsbury says, Ida Reigned the first in the Kingdom of Northumberland, 
Fol. 8. ● n. 40.  but whether he made himself King, verum atrum ipse per se Principatum invaserit, or took it by the consent of others, he could not define, parum definio quid Veritas in abdito est. In Brompton, whom he citys in the Margin, there is nothing to be found of an Election, but only that the Northumber's tumultuously set up some Kings, and Murdered and Dethroned others; which was a common Practice in most Kingdoms during the Saxon Heptarchy; and the same Reason the Author gives, that he would not meddle with this Kingdom, might have been given for the passing by all the other, except the Kingdom of the West Saxons.    

The Author's words, p. 15.  
But if by the Fundamental Constitution, Allegiance were indispensably due to the next Rightful Heir in this Monarchy, how came Aethelsian to be Crowned magno consensu Optimatum, says Malmsbury, when he was not the rightful Heir?  

HISTORY.  

●lor. Wi●rn. A D. 24. f. ●2.  Invictissimus rex Edwardus senior ex hâc vitâ transiens Aethelstano filio regni gubernacula reliquit; nec multo post filius ejus Aelfwardus (alias Edwardus) apud Oxenfordam decessit, & sepultus est ubi & pater illius. Aethelstanus vero in Kingestune, i. e. in Regiâ Villâ, in regem elevatur, & honorificie ab Athelmo, Dorobernensi Archiepiscopo, consecratur. The invincible King Edward the Elder, passing out of this World, left the Government of his Kingdom to his Son Aethelstan; and not long after him, his Son Aelward (or Edward) died at Oxford, and was buried where his Father was; but, or then, Aethelstan was saluted King, and was honourably Consecrated or Anointed and Crowned by Athelm Archbishop of Canterbury at Kingston. Anno Dominicae Incarnationis 924. 
●lms. f. ●. n. 10.  Aethelstanus filius Edwardi regnare coepit, frater ejus Ethelwardus (alias Edwardus) paucis diebus post patrem vita decedens, sepulturam cum eodem Wintoniae meruerat. This is what Florence of Worcester says, and needs no Translation. 
●dem.  Itaque magno consensu optimatum Electus, apud Regiam villam, Quae vocatur Kingston Coronatus. Therefore being Elected, or Recognized by full consent of the Great Men, he was Crowned at Kingston; and in another Place, 
●. f. 27. ●. 30. Westm. 84. n.  Post mortem Patris, & Interitum Fratris, in Regem apud Kingston coronatus est. Anno. Gratiae 924. Rex Anglorum Edwardus cognomento senior diem clausit extremum, Aethelstanus quoque filius ejus primogenitus, apud Kingstonam rex creatus, ab Athelmo Dorobernensi Archiepiscopo consecratur. Here Mat. Westm. says, Aethelstan was King Edward's Eldest Son, which was true after his Brother was dead. If the Author had taken notice of these Historians, especially of Malmsbury, whom he citys, he would have known how Aethelstan came to be rightful Heir.    

The Author's words, p. 15.  
Some say (from an old Monk in Malmsbury) that his Father left him his Crown by his Testament; (which doth not clear the difficulty, as to the inviolable right of Succession by the Constitution) But this cannot be true, for his Elder Brother Edward died after his Father, and none pretend that his Father disinherited him.  

History and Inquiry into these Words.  
A pretty Story. This old Monk in Malmsbury, was William of Malmsbury himself (whom he cited but two Lines before) Jussu Patris in Testamento Aethelstanus in Regem acclamatus est. This the Historian says of himself, without vouching any old Monk for it. By the command of his Father in his Testament, Aethelstan was Proclaimed or Saluted King. Which clears the difficulty about Election, and the States having power to dispose of the Crown. As to the truth of it, no body can doubt, that observes what is said before of his Elder Brother Edward.    

The Author's Words, p. 15.  
And if Athelstan was Lawful Heir, 
M. Westm. A. D. 934. A. D. 939.  what made him to dispatch his Brother Edwin out of the way, and to build two Monastries for expiation of that Gild?  

HISTORY.  
Florence of Worcester hath nothing of this Idle Story; and Malmsbury, from whom Matt. Westminster transcribed the very words of it (and added something of his own) did not believe it, and tells it as a Fable; but before he gins it, he Apologises for telling it; and after he had reported the Design, and Conspiracy of Alfred against King Athelstan, who would have made him a Bastard, and so kept him from the Throne, saith thus, Et haec quidem fide integra de rege conscripsi: 
Malmg. f. 29 a. n. 10, l. 2. c. 6.  sequentia magis Cantilenis per Successiones temporum detritis, quam libri ad Institutiones posterorum elucubratis didicerim. Quae ideo apposui, non ut earum veritatem defendam, sed ne Lectorum scientiam defraudem, ac primum de Nativitate dicendum. And these things I have written concerning the King, may entirely be believed. Those which follow, I rather learned from old Songs and Tales, than Books written for the Information of Posterity, which I have inserted here, 
Ibid. n. 20, 30, 40.  not that I shall defend the truth of them, but that I may not keep from the Readers what is to be known; and then proceeds to tell a Romantic Prodigy of a Shepherds Beautiful Daughter, out of whose Womb a Moon shone, that irradiated all England, etc. With this Virgin Edward the Elder stole a leap, by the assistance of his sometime Nurse, and upon the first Enjoyment of her, begat Aethelstan, etc. And goes on to tell, Edwin his Brother was accused by some to have been in the Conspiracy with Alfred, and for that Reason, out of Jealously, he was by order of Aethelstan put into a small Pinnace, without either Tackle, or Oars, accompanied only with one Page, with grief whereof he leapt into the Sea and drowned himself. After this he immediately subjoins; Haec de fratris niece, etsi verisimilia videantur, eò minùs corrobero, quod mirabilem suae pietatis diligentiam in reliquos fratres intenderet. Quos cum pater pueros admodum reliquisset, ille parvos magnâ dulcedine fovit, & adultos regni consortes fecit. Although these things concerning the death of his Brother may seem probable, yet I esteem them less firm, by reason of the admirable Piety he showed towards his other Brothers; whom he cherished with great kindness, when his Father left them very Children; and when they were grown up, made them sharers in the Government. Not one word in Malmsbury of Athelstan's building two Monasteries, to expiate the Gild of Edwin's murder. This was Westminster's own.    

The Author's Words, p. 15.  
How came Alfred to oppose his Election, as being Illegitimate, as Malmsbury confesses?  

HISTORY.  
He also confesses, That Alfred and his Complices were factious People, who reported he was born of a Concubine, 
Malmsb. l. 2 〈…〉 2 〈…〉 10.  to obviate his being Crowned; and that Sedition never wants Abettors. Aethelstanus apua Regia villa quae vocatur Kingston coronatus, quamvis Quidam Alfredus cum factiosis suis, (quia seditio semper invenit complices) obviare tentâsset: occasio contradictionis, ut ferunt. quod Aethelstanus ex Concubinâ natus esset; and in another place, King Edward and his Son Elward, 
〈…〉.  or Edward, being dead, Tunc omnium spebus in Ethelstanum erectis; solus Alfredus magnae insolentiae homo cum suis clam restitit quoad potuit, dedignatus subdi Domino, quem suo non delegisset arbitrio. Then all men's hopes were placed upon Ethelstan, only Alfred a Man of great insolence, and his Party opposed him, disdaining to submit to a Governor, that he himself had not set up.    

The Author's Words, p. 15.  
But Mat. Westm. gives the Reason: The times were then difficult, and Edward's other Sons were too young to m●nage the Government, and therefore they set up Athelstan, as one fit for Business.  

HISTORY.  
Mat. Westm. transcribes many of the Words of Malmsbury in the place last cited; but leaves out that Clause of Alfred's being an Insolent Man, and his making opposition to Athelstan; and adds this of his own, 
A. D. 934. f 186. n. 20.  Spreto Edwino, nondum ad regnandum propter teneros annos idoneo, Aethelstanum in Kingstonâ consecrauêrunt. From the partial Construction and Explication of these last Words above what they will bear, the Author hath set up a particular Sense of his own, against the Sense and Report of all other Historians; nay, against the Report of M. Westm. himself, 
A. D. 924.  who says, Aethelstan was made King, and Crowned as Edward's eldest Son.  
After the Death of Aethelstan, his own Author says, 
M. Westm. A. D. 940. f. 187. lin. 5.  Successit ei in regnum frater ejus, & haeres legitimus Eadmundus. His Brother, and lawful Heir, Edmaend succeeded him.    

The Author's Words, p. 16.  
How came Edred to succeed Edmund, and not his own Sons Edwin, and Edgar? Mat. Westminster and Brompton give the same Reason, 
M. Westm. A. 946. Brompt. p. 862. Flor. Wig. A. 949.  They were uncapable by reason of their Age: Repugnance illegitimâ aetate patri succedere non valebant. Florence of Worcester saith, The Northumber's swore Allegiance to Edred; and he saith, He was next Heir; and yet there were two Sons of Edmond before him; for he confesses, that they were the Sons of Edmond and Algiva his Queen.  

HISTORY.  

M. Westm. f. 188. n. 30.  Defuncto Edmundo & apud Glastoniam sepulto, Eadredus frater ejus, in Kingstona regiâ villâ, regni diadema à B. Othone Archiep. Cantuariensi suscepit. Reliquit quoque duos filios, haeredes legitimos, Eadwinum & Eadgarum, qui repugnante illegitima aetate, patri succedere non valebant. Edmund being dead, his Brother Edred was Crowned by Otho Archbishop of Canterbury. He left also two Sons his lawful Heirs, Edwin and Edgar; who by reason of their Nonage, could not succeed their Father.  
Mortuo Edmundo rege, 
Brompton, col. 862. n. 20.  Edredus frater suus, filiusque Regis Adelstani, eo quod pueri Edwinus & Edgarus filii Edmundi, pra immaturâ aetate adhuc regnare non poterant, sibi in Regem successit, & ab Odone Dorobernensi Archiep. consecratus est, A. D. 947. Edmund being dead Edred his Brother, and the Son of King Athelstan, succeeded him as King, for that the Children Edwin and Edgar, the Sons of Edmund, by reason of their tender Age, could not as yet reign.  
Magnificus rex Anglorum Edmundus die festivitatis Sancti Augustini, etc. interficitur; 
Flor. Wig. f. 604. A. D. 946.  mox proximus haeres Edredus fratri succedens, regnum naturale suscepit, a Sancto Odone, etc. The Magnificent King Edmund was killed on the Festival of St. Austin; presently the next Heir Edred, succeeding his Brother, took upon him the Government according to Nature, or according to Natural Duty and Affection.  
If the Author had fairly and truly cited these Three Pieces of History, it had not been impossible to have found out that Edred was but only Tutor, Curator, Regent, or Protector of the young Princes, and Kingdom; and so took upon him the Government, until they were of sufficient Age. Westminster says, Edwin and Edgar were the lawful Heirs of Edmund, (which Words the Author left out) but could not succeed him by reason of their Nonage, or that they were not of lawful Age. Brompton says, Edred succeeded his Brother, for that his Sons Edwin and Edgar, by reason of their immature Age could not yet reign. As much as to say, Tho in respect of their Age they could not at present, yet afterwards in their riper Years they were to reign; and so they did successively. Lastly, Florence of Worcester says, Edred was next Heir. What Heir could he be to his Brother, but Epistolary or Testamentary Heir, or Successor? (For in that sense Hares is commonly used.) And so 'twas most probable, by some Instrument or other he made him Tutor, Curator, Regent, or Protector of his Sons and Kingdom; or that by Consent of the Great Men, he took upon him the Tutorship, and Regency. For what other Meaning can those Words have, regnum naturale suscepit, than that according to natural Duty and Affection he took upon him the Government, and Protection of his Nephews, and their Kingdom? But how then came it to pass, that he was Crowned, and called King? 'Tis not hard to answer this Question: For anciently the Sons and Heirs of Emperors, Kings, Dukes, Earls, Barons, were not always called so; but Heirs only of the Empire, Kingdom, Dukedom, 
Du Fresn Gloss. vol. 2. in verb. Haeredes, col. 686, 687.  etc. And the Tutor, Curator, Governor, or Protector, and such as had the Care of them, and the Administration of the Government, were then called Emperors, Kings, Dukes, Earls, etc. of such Empires, Kingdoms, Dukedoms, etc. until the Heir came of Age; and sometimes those Curators and Guardian Kings and Emperors were anointed and crowned: But when the Heirs were of lawful Age, they quitted their Curatorships and Regency, and parted with or laid down all Royal Marks of Majesty, retaining only the Name and Honour of King: And the Title of King, and the Ceremony of Coronation, was allowed and granted to such Regent's, that they might have the greater Authority with the People. Of such Curators, Tutors, or Regent's, Du Fresn gives several Examples; and of Odo Duke of Aquitain, Tutor to Charles the Simple, not much before this time, and of other Kings of France, that had Crowned Tutors with the Titles of Kings.    

The Author's Words, p. 16.  

A. 957.  After the Death of Edred, the eldest Son of Edmond succeeded; but being found under a Moral Incapacity (for in Florentius his words, and M. Westminster, In commisso regimine insipienter egit) he was set aside, as to all the Government beyond Thames, and Edgar put into it.  

HISTORY.  
Obiit Edredus Rex die S. Clementis festo, in aetatis vigore, 
Chron. Sax. A. D. 955  decem circiter annos regnabat, deinceps Eadwigus, Eadmundi Regis filius, regnum capessit, & Sanctum Dunstanum de terrâ fugavit.  
Eadwigus rex Calendis Octobris obiit. 
Ibid. A. D. 957.  Eadgarus autem frater ejus regnum capessit. Hic Sanctum Dunstanum accersit, eique Episcopatum Wigorniensem donavit, & postea Londinensem.  
King Edred died in the Festival of St. Clement, in the vigour of his Age, after he had reigned about Ten years. Then Eadwy the Son of Edmund enjoyed the Kingdom, and banished St. Dunstan.  
Eadwy died the First of October, and his Brother Edgar took the Kingdom, and recalled St. Dunstan, and gave him the Bishopric of Worcester, and afterward that of London. This Chronology hath not one word of the Northumber's and Mercians rejecting Edwy, and choosing Edgar.  
Rex Anglorum Eadwigus, 
Flor. Wigorn. eodem An.  quoniam in commisso regimine insipienter egit, a Mercensibus & Northimbrensibus contemptus relinquitur. & suus germanus Clito Eadgarus ab eis rex eligitur, sicque res Regum sejuncta est, ut flumen Thamesii regnum disterminaret amborum: mox Rex Mercensium Eadgarns heatum Dunstanum Abbatem (than Abbot of Glastenbury) cum honore & gloriâ revocavit. King Edwy, because he acted foolishly in his Government, was despised, and deserted by the Mercians, and Northumbrians, and his Brother Prince Edgar chosen; and the Government of the Kings was so divided, as the Thames bounded both their Kingdoms: and King Edgar presently called back St. Dunstan the Abbot with honour and glory. The Words of M. Westminster are mostly the very same, as these before-cited; the Sense differs not. After this, they both tell, how Abbot Dunstan was made, first Bishop of Worcester, then of London, by King Edgar. The Author at his first entrance upon the Saxon Instances, p. 15. said, he would not meddle with the Kingdom of Northumber's (which in this place both the Historians he citys do expressly mention) for Reasons there given; and therefore thinking this Instance to be for his purpose, he cunningly omits to mention that Nation, as believing for his own Reasons it might undervalue the Instance; and only says, Edwy was set aside as to all the Government beyond Thames, and Edgar put into it.  
But what if the Northumbrians and Mercians did reject him? 'Twas no more than the Northumbrians had done in the two preceding Reigns. 
Flor. Wig. A. D. 926.  They made a League with Aethelstan, and confirmed it by Oath; yet they called in Anlaf a Pagan King, and raised War against him: And tho' he, 
Ibid. A. D. 937.  and Constantine King of Scots his Assistant, and the Northumbrians were baffled with great Slaughter of their Men, yet but Four years after, and in the First year of King Edmund, 
Ibid. A. D. 941.  Northimbrenses fidelitati, quam magnifico regi Anglorum Edmundo, debebant, infidelitatem praeferentes, Regem Northmannorum Anlafam sibi in regem eligêrunt. The Northumbrians preferring Infidelity to the Fealty they ought to the Magnificent King Edmund, chose Anlaf King of Norway for their King. 
Ibid. A. D. 944.  Three years after, Magnificus rex Anglorum Edmundus duos reges Anlafum, Regis videlicet Sithrici filium, & Reignoldum Guthfredi filium de Northumbriâ expulit, eamque suae ditioni subegit. King Edmund drove two Kings, Anlaf the Son of Sithric, and Reinold the Son of Gutred, out of Northumberland, and conquered, or reduced it under his Power. 
Ibid. A. D. 949.  And Five years after that, Wolstanus Archiepiscopus Eboracensis, proceresque Northimhembrenses omnes, egregio regi Anglorum Edredo fidelitatem juraverunt, sed non illam diu tenuerunt. Wulstan Archbishop of York, and all the Great Men of Northumberland, swore Fealty to the famous King Edred, but did not long keep it: Namque quendam Danicâ stirpe progenitum (Ircum nomine) super se Regem levaverunt. For they set up Iric, a Dane, King over them: And the very next year King Edred threatening to destroy the whole Country, 
Ibid. A. D. 950.  they threw down Iric, (Ircum quem sibi regem praefecerant abjecêrunt) and compounded with Edred for a great Sum of Money. 
Ibid. A. D. 957.  And seven years after they revolted from Edwin, and set up his Brother Edgar: And like them were the Mercians. Would any Man fetch an Instance from these People, to confirm and warrant what he would prove, or have thought to be a just and regular Proceeding?  
But what was his Crime? How did he play the Fool? Why, 
Malmsb. l. 11. c. 7. f. 30. a. n. 20. 30.  he banished Dunstan Chief of the Monks, turned the Monks out of Monasteries, and put in Secular Priests, and made bold with the Monk's Revenue: By which Folly he made them his Enemies, and lost the People, so as he could not chastise the Northumbrians, as Edred had done before him; and so was forced to be content to let his Brother Edgar enjoy Mercia and Northumberland; 
Chron. Sax. A. D. 957.  who forthwith recalled Dunstan from Exile, and restored the Monks, where he could; which made him secure against his Brother Edwy, after whose Death he possessed the whole Nation.    

The Author's Words, p. 16.  
How came there to be a Dispute about the Election, after the death of Edgar, between his eldest Son Edward, and Etheldred his youngest?  

HISTORY.  
Malmsbury answers the Question. 
L. 2. c. 9 f. 33. b. n. 40.  Edwardum Dunstanus & ceteri Episcopi consentanci, regali culmine sublimârunt, contra voluntatem quorundam (ut aiunt) Optimatum & Novercae, quae vix Septem annorum puerulum Ethelredum filium, suum provehere conabatur, ut ipsa potius sub ejus nomine imperitaret. Dunstan and the other Bishops that agreed with him, set Edward in the Throne, against the mind (as they say) of some great Men, and his Stepmother, who endeavoured to set up her Son Ethelred, a Child scarce Seven Years old, that under his name she might reign.    

The Author's Words, p. 16.  
I lay no force upon his Mother's endeavours to advance him; but if there had been such an unalterable Right of Succession, there had not been any colour or pretence for it.  
'tis true, there neither was nor could be any; yet she with her Friends endeavoured it, and seeing she could not do it that way, she afterwards caused Edward to be murdered, that the Right of Succession might be in her Son after the Eldest was taken away; so much the unalterable Right of Succession was then understood. But saith Flor. Wig. there was a great Contention amongst the great Men about the choice of the King. 
A. 975.  How could there be any dispute if they knew the Constitution of the Kingdom to be, that the next Heir must inherit the Crown.  

HISTORY.  

Flor. Wig. f. 607. A. D. 975.  De rege eligendo magna inter regni primores oborta est dissentio. Quidam namque Regis filium Edwardum, quidam autem fratrem illius elegerunt Ethelredum Quam ob causam Archipraesules, Dunstanus & Oswaldus cum Corepiscopis, Abbatibus, Ducibusque quam plurimis, in unum convenerunt, & Edwardum, ut pater ejus praeciperat, elegerunt, electum consecraverunt, & in Regem unxerunt. There was a great Contention amongst the prime Men of the Kingdom about choosing, or setting up a King. Some were for Edward, some for Ethelred; For which cause the Archbishops Dunstan and Oswald, with their Suffragans, the Abbots, and very many great Men, assembled and chose Edward, as his Father had commanded, consecrated and anointed him King. From what hath been said before, it appears those that would have set up Ethelred against the Right of Succession, and against Edward, King Edgar's eldest Son, were his Stepmother and her Party: the others that opposed her Design, and kept fast to Edward, were for the Right of Succession: with the last the Parliament, as the Constitution then was, or the Great Assembly of the Nation, that is, the Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, and very many Noblemen concurred, and chose, or recognized and crowned Edward their King; whom his Father at his Death Regni & morum Haeredem reliquit, 
Ibidem.  left Heir of his Kingdom and Temper. It cannot be thought but this Assembly understood the Constitution of the Nation; and yet there arose a dispute about the Succession. The best Laws in the World cannot keep Men from being wicked, nor secure the Government from the Attempts of Intruders and Usurpers, when they think they have Opportunity and Means to set themselves up, let the Constitution be never so clear and well known. If the Author would have looked into, or considered the cause of this Contention about the Succession, he might as well have asked how can there be any Intruders against the known Constitution, as how could there be a Dispute about the Succession? M. Westminster says, 
A. D. 977  Edward retained only the Name of a King, and by the Flattery of his Stepmother, he permitted to her and her Son Aethelred the Transaction of all the Affairs of the Kingdom. 
Ibid. A. D 978. Flor. Wig●eod Anno.  Yet so powerful a thing, and so agreeable to the Constitution, was Succession by Birth right, that for the establishing her Son in the Throne, the very next Year she caused Edward to be murdered, and triumphed at his Death.  
The next are his Danish Instances. These People had the Sword only for their Title, and stayed but Five and twenty Years or thereabouts: Nor can any Man affirm from our Historians what the Constitution of the Kingdom was then, as to the Government or Governors; and the manner of, and chief pretence to the Succession, was Donation; as hath been noted before, to which the Reader is referred. Edmund Ironside, the true lineal Saxon Heir, made an agreement with Canutus, and divided the Kingdom with him, who had no other pretence to the Throne, than his Father Swane's Conquest, and his own Army of Danes to make it good. After the Death of Edmund, the Bishops and English Nobility swore they would have Cnute for their King, would humbly obey him, and pay his Taxes for his Army. 
●●id. A. D. ●16. f. 18.  Eique humiliter obedire vellent, & suo exercitui vectigalia dare. Let the Author say, whether it were not Force and Fear made these Men swear?    

The Author's Words, p. 17.  
After the death of Canutus, a new difference arose about the Succession; 
〈◊〉. 1055.  some were for Harold, his supposed Son by Algiva; others for Hardecnute. his Son by Emma.  

HISTORY.  
After the Death of Cnute, 
●almsb. l. c. 12. f. ●. b. n. 50. 43. a lin. etc.  Elegerûnt Haraldum Dani & Londoniae cives, qui jam penè in Barbacorum mores propter frequentem convictum transierant. Angli diu obstiterint, magis unum ex filiis Ethelredi, qui in Normanniâ, vel Hardecnutum filium Cnutonii ex Emma, qui tunc in Danemarchia erat, regem habere volentes. The Danes, and Citizens of London, who were almost become barbarous by their Converse with them, chose Harald: the English opposed, and had rather have had for their King one of the Sons of Ethelred, who were then in Normandy, or Hardecnute, the Son of Cnute by Emme, who was then in Danemark, Earl Godwin, who professed himself Tutor or Curator of the Children (pupillorum Tutorem se professus) headed the English; but at length, being unequal in Force and Number, gave way to violence; sed tandem vi & numero impar, cêssit violentiae. All Historians concluded Harald to have been a Bastard; yet without doubt he had a very great Command in his Father's Army, which set him up; and it may be with the Assistance of the complying English.    

The Author's Word's, p. 17.  
If the Lineal Succession were a part of our Constitution; how come such perpetual Disputes to be concerning it? For if it had been owned as a Fundamental Law, the right of Succession must have been clear beyond dispute.  

What may be said to the Reasoning of the Author.  
The Author would be thought to have read much History; but certainly he never considered what he read. Did he in all his reading never meet with Usurpers, Invaders, and Intruders? Did he never read of Men, that above all things desired to be Kings, though they knew they had no right to be so? Did he never read of the Attempts of such Men to make themselves so; and that some have failed, and others succeeded in those Attempts? Did he never read, that such Men always had Abettors, and a Party to carry on their Designs? Did he never hear of such wicked Men, as have acted contrary to the light of Nature, and their own Consciences? or to the great Rule of all Mankind; Do as you would have others do unto you? The Fundamental Law of Succession may be as clear, as the light itself; yet Invaders, though they know it, will not see it, nor do think themselves bound by it; but their whole Contrivance is how to evade, baffle, and enervate that Law, and every other Law that stands in their way, and yet pretend to advance the Public Interest, the Common Good of the People, when they intent only to set up their own, and the Interest of the Party, against the known Laws of the Nation. If these things have frequently been, they may be so again. 'Tis the Invader, and Intruder, makes the Dispute, not the Person in Possession by a Lawful Title; he never goes about to quarrel with his own Right and just Occupancy; and therefore 'tis not hard to know, how Disputes come to be about Lineal Succession. Though the Right be clear beyond dispute, Men of designs against the clearest Right will take hold of, and make advantage of every opportunity to do their business.    

The Words of the Author subjoined to his Reasoning, p. 17.  
But reason of State, and the public Interest still overruled this matter; and so Ethelred's Sons by Emma, who were the true Heirs by Legal Succession, were set aside; and Harold, being upon the place, and so best able to manage the Affairs of the Kingdom, carried it.  

What may be said to the Author's Inference from his precedent Reasoning.  
A fine Piece of Art and Legerdemain. How did Harold carry it? Malmsbury tells us by force and violence. What reason of State, or public Interest could make the Saxons set aside the next Heir, (if they could have had him for their King) and place in the Throne a Stranger, the Son of a Conqueror, with his Father's Army at his Heels? Had not the Danes the greatest share in making him King? and could the Saxons think otherwise, than that they would have the greatest share in the Government? What Affairs of the Kingdom was Harald best able to manage? Certainly not the Affairs, and public Interest of the Saxons: They could not believe it, when he had an Army, and great numbers of his own Countrymen, with their Families, to provide for; and when they could not but see, the Nation was to be planted by Foreigners, who must be their Masters. Therefore what reason of State, what public Interest could there be, for Harold's carrying of the Crown and Kingdom, as the Author neatly Phraseth it?    

The Words of the Author, p. 18.  
For if there be no Rule, it is not possible to satisfy Conscience in the Niceties of Titles, If there be a Rule, the general consent of the people, joined with the Common Good, seems to have been that which our Ancestors proceeded by.  

What may be opposed to this saying.  
The general Consent of the People, in conjunction with Common Good, or these two joined, never was actually in Practice, nor never can be. Where, or how can all the People meet? or if that could be, how can they join in establishing of the Notion of Common Good? Were they ever all of one mind? Were not they ever, since things were, of divers Parties, and those of different Judgements, what the Common Good was? Was there not partiality in every Party? And did not every Party helieve that was the Common Good, which they apprehended to be so, and suited best with their Interest, and Proposals to themselves? But the People meet by their Representatives. Did ever all the People meet to choose them? Hath not a Party commonly chosen for the whole, excluding all others? Or have not Men of a Party imposed themselves upon the People, and usurped the general consent of the whole? Upon a strict enquiry, this will appear to have been the general Practice. Where then is the General Consent of the People; as for Common Good, enough hath been said before to invalidate that pretence; and for the Conjunction of the General consent of the People and Common Good, the Author talks of, let him show it practicable if he can. Do as you would be done by, is the Ground and Foundation of Common Good (as hath been said before) but when, and where did the general and free Consent of the People, high and low, concur and unite in this Foundation? If all Men would build upon it, none could receive wrong or injury; there could be no Disputes about any matter whatever, if Men would make this Rule the measure of their Actions. In the mean time, while Men can arrive at this perfection, The Legal Constitution by which the Kingdom hath flourished, and been supported in great Reputation for some hundreds of years, is the best and safest Rule for all sober Men (to use the Author's Phrase) to proceed by. When Men go from the Law, and legal Establishment, they walk in the dark, and go they know not whither, and travel while they make themselves not only uneasy but miserable.  
'Tis a strange fate upon the People, that their name is always used; their benefit pretended; their power to create right to Govern, and Governors magnified by restless Projectors, whose only design is to dig up the very Foundations of Legal Settlements, and such as by many Ages have been found by experience to have been for the ease, quiet, and benefit of the People, who are never in greater danger, than when they listen to such Men, that promise to make them happy by Eutopian, Illegal, and Impracticable Schemes and Devices; after misery and desolation is brought upon them, their Consent is pretended, and vouched to warrant it. If the Author could have prevailed with himself to have read the several Declarations, Remonstrances, and almost innumerable other Papers, printed between the years 1640. and 1660. all filled with the Consent, Rights, and Authority of the People; and holding forth Common Good, and Public Interest, and asserting and maintaining both those impracticable Notions (after such manner, as the People are made to believe they belong unto them) in every change of Affairs and Government, that then happened; he could not have been so fond of, or so often have vainly, and to no purpose repeated these two empty, idle say, and expressions.    

The Author's Words, p. 19  
I take ours to be a true, original Monarchy; especially after the Rights of the lesser Monarchies were swallowed up, or delivered into that of the West-Saxon Kings. And farther, I do not stick to affirm, that it was Hereditary, where the Right of Succession and the Public Good, did not interfere, i. e. where there was not a natural or moral Incapacity; a natural, as in the Sons of the Elder Edmond, when Edred was made King before them; a Moral, as when Edgar's Elder Brother was set aside for ill Government by one half of the Nation, and the other never disputed the matter with them.  

What may be said this.  
As to his Distinction of natural or moral Incapacity, since a Protector, or a Protector and Council may supply, and have often supplied both those incapacities, it signifies nothing. And as to his Examples of Edred's Government in the Minority of Edmund's Sons; and of Edwy, Edgar's elder Brother, being deserted by half the Nation, they have been spoken to before.    

The Author's words in the same Page.  
These things I mention to show, That although this were a true and successive Monarchy in ordinary course; yet where the Public Good was by the Estates of the Realm judged to require it; they thought it no Perjury or breach of Faith, to transfer their Allegiance, although it were without the consent of the actual Governor, or the next Lineal Heir.  

What may be said to this Passage.  
The things hitherto mentioned by the Author, were his Saxon and Danish Instances; and whatever appears by those Instances to have been done, was done by a Party (as hath been shown from undoubted History) and not by Representatives of the Nation; yet such Party or Parties he calls the States of the Realm, as his Tutor Robert Parsons the Jesuit, alias Doleman, hath taught him; especially in the 4th, 7th, 8th, and 9th Chapters of the first part of his Conference about the Succession to the Crown of England: where are to be found all the Author's Saxon and Danish Instances urged, and applied in the same manner, and to the same purpose, as they are in this Author; and also his two Norman Instances, that of Maud the Empress, Hen. 2, and King Stephen; the other of the two Houses of Tork and Lancaster, in his Second Part of the Conference, cap. 2. and 3. and likewise in Mr. pryn's first Part of the Sovereignty of Parliament and Kingdom, p. 7, 8, 9 and the two Norman Instances p. 94, 95. Mr. Pryn followed Doleman, who says all Kings that take Coronation Oaths are Elected. Conf. of Success: part 1. cap. 5. and all Invaders, or Intruders, that set up themselves by the help of a Party only, were Elected and set up by the States, or Commonwealth. Those Parties the Jesuit calls the State or Commonwealth, Mr. Pryn calls Parliament or Kingdom in the very same Instances; but this Author is best pleased with the Jesuits Expressions, and useth them most frequently. But if he had considered what Mr. Pryn hath written since the year 1648. and in that year against his own former Notions and Opinions, about the Sovereignty of Parliament and Kingdom, etc. especially his Plea for the House of Lords, his four Parts of a brief Register of Parliament Writs, his Animadversions upon Coke's 4th. Institute, and many other Writings, and the Epistles to them; He would never have Published such Instances, baffled by him, and many others.  
If the States (as he calls them) had had upon the Consideration of Public Good, the Power he speaks of, and that it was known and legal; or if the Crown had according to the Constitution been at their Disposal; supposing the Saxon Estates had freely chosen Canutus, as he vainly Asserts; what could prompt him to cause Edwin, 
Flor. Wig. A. D. 1016.  Edmond Ironside's Brother, to be murdered, and to send his two Sons Edward and Edmond to the King of Sweves, that they also might be murdered? And if the Succession had not been notoriously, wholly, and completely Hereditary; what need he to have feared the Title, and Succession of the Sons and Brother of Edmond, if it had been true what the Author insinuates, that he was legally Elected, and upon account of the Public Good? Besides imposing Parties, small Numbers, and Factions upon his Readers, and calling them the States; he hath another pretty knack of imposing upon them, by telling them Oaths made to foreign Kings (such as the Danes were) and forced upon the Nation by Foreign Armies) was transferring of Allegiance; as if the People then were wonderfully pleased, and satisfied with their new Masters. From these Instances and Topics he might as well have proved, that because this Nation hath been overrun, and possessed by Saxons and Danes, with their miscellaneous Assistants; therefore it may be expedient it should be so again. They seem to be Arguments to encourage such another undertaking, rather than any thing else.  
After the Saxon Constitution, he comes to the Norman, and there makes only two Instances.    

The words of the Author, p. 20.  
The first Instance I shall bring, is in the Case of the Oath taken to Maud the Daughter of Hen. 1. in the Thirty first year of his Reign: and there is no question, but he designed signed her to succeed him, 
Malmsb. Hist. novest. l. 1. p. 100 105. 2.  legitima & perenni successione, as Malmsbury's words are: but Stephen who had before sworn Allegiance to her) watched his opportunity, and by the help of a Party made by his Brother (the Bishop of Winchester) he was Crowned King; and although at first, Malmsbury saith, but three Bishops, and very few Noblemen joined with him; yet he soon after saith, that most of them went into him; and even Robert of Gloucester, King Henry the first's natutural Son, took an Oath to him, but with the Condition of his preserving his Honour and Covenants. There are several things worth our observation, in this affair, with respect to the Oaths of Allegiance.  

HISTORY.  

Malmsb. f. 99 a. n. 30.  Anno 27. Regni sui Rex Henricus Angliam venit mense Septembri, adducens secum filiiam suam, etc. In the 27th. year of his Reign King Henry came to England, in the Month of September, and brought with him his Daughter. He called together at Christmas a great number of the Clergy and chief Men of the Kingdom at London; and being much grieved he was like to have no Children by his Second Wife, the ●uke of Lorrain's Daughter; he was very thoughtful about a Successor; and having a long time before deliberated about that matter, Tunc in eodem Concilio, omnes totius Angliae Optimates, Episcopos etiam & Abbate● sacramento adegit & obstrinxit; ut si ipsi sine haerede masculo decederet, Matildam filiam suam, quondam Imperatricem, incunctanter & sine ulla retractatione Dominam reciperent, Then in the same Council he bond all the chief men of England, the Bishops also, and Abbats by Oath, that if he should die without Heir Male, they should forthwith, without retraction or revoking their Oath, receive his Daughter Maud, late Empress, for their Queen. Having before told them what a great loss the Nation sustained by the death of his Son William, to whom by right the Kingdom belonged; and now that his Daughter survived, to whom only the lawful Succession was due, from her Grandfather, Uncle, and Father, that were Kings, and from the Stock of her Mother many Ages; 
Ibid. n. 40.  cui soli legitima debeatur successio, ab avo, avunculo, & patre regibus, & a materno genere multis retro seculis; siquidem ab Egbirtho West-Saxonum rege, etc. For from Egbert, King of the Westsaxons, who first subdued the other Saxon Kings, in the year 800, during the Reign of 
* The Historian doth not reckon the Danish Kings amongst them, there were 14 Saxon Kings beside them. Ibid. n. 50. b. lin. 1. etc. Ibid. f. 100 a. n. 40.  Fourteen Kings, unto the year 1043. when Edward the Confessor was Crowned King, the Line of the Royal Blood never failed, nor was there one wrong step, or halt made in the Succession; nec unquam ejusdem regalis sanguinis linea defecit, nec in Successione regni claudicavit. All Persons of any moment in this Council did take the Oath, first William Archbishop of Canterbury, than the other Bishops and Abbats. The first of the Laymen that took it, was David King of Scors, the next Stephen Earl of Mortaign, and Bologn (afterward King Stephen) and then Robert Duke of Gloucester, King Henry's natural Son.  
Anno. 31. Regni sui Rex Henricus rediit in Angliam, etc. In the thirtyfirst year of his Reign, King Henry returned into England, and the Empress also; and in a great Assembly of the Nobility or Great Men at Northampton, those which had sworn before, renewed their Oath, and those that had not, did then swear, or give their Faith unto her.  
King Henry died in the Thirty fifth year of his Reign; 
Ibid. b. n. 30.  and in his Sickness being asked by Robert Earl of Gloucester, and the Nobleman that were then with him, about a Successor; a quibus de successore interrogatus, filiae omnem terram suam, citra & ultra mare, legitima & perenni Successione adjudicavit, he gave all his Lands every where to his Daughter, as to his Lawful Successor.  
After the death of King Henry, 
Ibid. f. 101. a. lin. 5.  which happened upon the first of December that year; the Empress, Robert Earl of Gloucester, with most of the Noblemen, delayed their return for England: whereas Stephen made all the haste he could, and by the readiest Passage being come, the Londoners and People of Winchester own him a King: 
Ibid. n. 10.  And he drew unto him Roger Bishop of Salisbury, and William de Pont Larch, Keeper of the King's Treasure: But all his Endeavars had come to nothing, 
Ibid. n. 20.  if his Brother Henry Bishop of Winchester, and at that time the Pope's Legate, had not been his best Assistant. William Archbishop of Canterbury required of him an Oath, That he would restore and preserve the Liberties of the Church, and the Bishop of Winchester became his Surety● for the doing of it. He was very sweet in his Promises, but they wanted performance. He was Crowned the 22 of December, there being present only three Bishops, the Archbishop, the Bishops of Winchester and Salisbury, no Abbats, and but few Noble or Great Men. 
Ibidem.  Coronatus est ergo in regem Angliae Stephanus, undeci●o Calend●● Januarii 1135. tribus Episcopis prasentibus, Archiepiscopo, Wintoniensi, Saresberiensi, null● Abbatib●s, pancissimus Optimatibus.  

Ibid. n. 40.  Having made the Treasurers of his Party, he immediately became Master of the Treasure, which was near 100000 l. in ready Money, besides Gold and Silver Vessels of great weight, and inestimable value. Having so great Treasure, he could not want Assistants, 
Ibidem.  hanc copi●m Gazarum habenti, auxiliatores d●esse non poterant, especially being very profuse in his Gifts. All sorts of Soldiers stocked to him out of Flanders, and Britain, most notorious Plunderers, 
Ibid. n. 50.  and cruel People, who rob Churches, and pulled Men of Religious. Orders from their Horses, and imprisoned them, without regard, Erat genus hominum rapacissimum & violentissimum, qui nil pensi haberent vel caemeteria frangere, vel Ecclesias expilare, Religiosi quinetiam ordinis viros non solùm equis proturbare, sed etiam indigenae militer, etc. 
Ibidem.  Neither were Strangers only, but homebred Soldiers or Knights, who hated Times of Peace, toward the end of King Henry's Reign, because than they lived meanly, easily brought to his Party, raising thereby their Fortunes from the Loss and Ruin of the People, 
Ibid. b. lin. 2. Ibid. lin. 3, 4.  Provineialium dispendio suas fortunas urgentes; Further, Stephen when he was Earl, by his easy and jocular Conversation, and his Familiarity with their meanest Persons, had wonderfully gained the Affections of the People, 
Ibid. lin. 5.  so that all the Noblemen of England came readily in to him. In the mean time, the wise Earl of Gloucester was folic ous how he might show them their Faults, and by Discourse bring them back to a better Opinion; for there was nothing to be attempted by Force, 
Ibid. lin. 7.  for the Causes before mentioned; nor was it free for him to come into England, unless for a time he could dissemble, and appear as if he were a Party in the Defection, (quasi defectionis eorum particeps) wherefore he did Homage to the King upon Condition, 
Ibid. n. 10.  that is to say, so long as he kept his Dignity entire, and performed his Agreement and Covenants, scilicet quamdiu ille dignitatem suam integre custodiret, & sibi pacta servaret: For long before he knew the Temper of the King, and foresaw the Instability of his Faith, spectato enim jamdudum regis ingenio, instabilitatem fidei praevidebat.  
In the same Year, 
Ibidem.  not much after the coming of the Earl, the Bishops swore Fealty to the King, so long as he should preserve the Liberty, and strict Discipline of the Church; 
Ibid. n. 20. 30.  which he then swore to do according to his Charter, that consists mostly of Privileges granted to the Clergy, and is there repeated, and is dated 1136, in the first Year of his Reign. But the Historian says, He disdained to put the Names of the Witnesses, which were many, because he changed all things so perversely, as if he had only sworn, that he might show the whole Kingdom, he had sworn to what he never intended to perform; 
Ibid. n. 40.  nomina Testium, qui multi fuêrunt, apponere fastidio; quia pene omnia ita perperam mutârunt, quasi ad hoc tantum jurâsset, ut praevaricatorem sacramenti se regno toti ostenderet. In this Grant, he says, he was chosen King by the Clergy and Laity, crowned by William Archbishop of Canterbury, and afterwards confirmed by Pope Innoeent; the Bull of which Confirmation may be seen in the History of Richard Prior of Hagulstad, col. 313. n 30. The Witnesses to his Charter, or Grant, were most of the Bishops, Earls, and Noblemen, and all Normans, and may be found in the same History, Col. 314. n 60. This is the true History, how Stephen came to be King, taken from William of Malmsbury, who lived and wrote at the very time these things were done, and wrote them at the Request of Robert Earl of Gloucester.    

The Author's Words, p. 20.  
The first Observation upon his own History of Maud's Title, and Stephen's coming to the Crown before noted, is, That if it hold that an Oath was first taken to Maud by the Bishops and Nobility, and afterwards to King Stephen, an Oath of Allegiance may cease without Discharge from the Party to whom it was made; and so the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishops of Winchester and Salisbury, as well as the Nobility, thought themselves at liberty to take a new Oath of Allegiance, without a Release from the Party concerned in the former Oath.  

What may be said to this.  
'Tis not to be doubted, but the Author knows what Religion was professed in this Nation at that time, and only that; and knows also, those of that Persuasion did, and do believe the Head of their Church had, and hath Power to make an Oath cease, without discharge from the Party to whom it is made: And so the three Bishops thought themselves at liberty to take a new Oath of Allegiance, without a Release from the Party concerned in the former Oath, when they had his Authority; and that they so had, is manifest from the following brief Narrative. Stephen was crowned on the Eleventh of the Kalends of January, 
Ibid. f. 101. a. n. 20. Ibid. n. 40. Ibid. b. n. 10.  or 22 of December; and the Earl of Gloucester came into England after Easter next following; and it was after his coming, that the Bishops swore Fealty to Stephen, Eodem anno non multùm post adventum Comitis jurauêrunt Episcopi Fidelitatem regi, etc. at which time he also swore to preserve the Liberty, and strict Discipline of the Church, as they were drawn up in a Charter or Grant, in which the Pope's Confirmation of his Title is mentioned; the beginning whereof runs thus: Ego Stephanus Dei gratiâ, 
Ibidem.  assensu Cleri & Populi in Regem Angliae electus, & a Domino Wilielmo Archiepiscopo Cantuariae, & Sanctae Ecclesim Romanae Legato consecratus, & ab Innocentio Sanctae sedis Romanae Pontifice postmodum confirmatus, etc. I Stephen by the Grace of God, by the Assent of the Clergy and People chosen King of England, crowned by William Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Legate of the Roman See, (who was his Brother) and confirmed by Pope Innocent, etc.  
And notwithstanding he was at first set up by the Fraud and Artifice of three or four Persons, and the Bishops especially, who then governed the Nation, and that he immediately forced himself upon the than Norman Government by an Army of Foreigners, plundering and cruel Flemings, and Britan's, and homebred Norman Soldiers, that knew not how to live, as appears by the History before-recited; yet the Archbishops and Bishops suggested to to the Pope, 
Richard Prior of Hagustald or Hextiam Col. 313. n. 30, 40, etc. in the Body of the Bull.  That after the Death of King Henry, Religion in England was disturbed, turbata est religio in regno Angliae, & nullum mandatum pacis seu justitia in adjutorio regali vigebat, and there was no Royal Command for either Peace or Justice: and that the greatest Wickednesses were committed with impunity, atque atrocitatem tantorum scelerum comitabatur impunitas, and that for the putting a stop to such Evils, Stephen was chosen King communi voto, & unanimi assensu tam procerum, quam etiam populi, by the common Vote and unanimous Assent of the Great Men and People, and crowned by the Bishops; and all this was testified by the Letters or Instruments of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Country, and the Lovers of the Holy Roman Church, the glorious King of France, and illustrious Earl 
† This was Theobald, Earl of Blois, Stephen's eldest Brother.  Theobald; Q●emadmodum venerabilium fratrum nostrorum, Archiepiscoporum earundem Regionum. & Amatorum Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae, gloriesi Francorum Regis, & illustrius Viri Comitis Theobaldi scripta testantur. Then upon this recounting the Suggestions, the Pope and Title-Maker, says, Nos cognoscentes Vota tantorum Virorum, in personam tu●m praecunte divina Gratia convenisse, etc. We knowing the Votes of such great Men to have concurred in the Choice of thy Person, by the Guidance of Divine Grace. And for these things, and his promise of Obedience, and doing Honour to St. Peter, he confirms wh●t had been done, and grants him the same Honour and Prerogative he had granted to his Predecessor Henry. This Bull of Confirmation was directed to King Stephen; Innocentius Episcopus, etc. carissimo in Christo filio Stephano illustri Anglorum regi salutem & Apostolicam benedictionem. From the precedent Narrative it is evident the Bishops solicited this Bull of Confirmation, and obtained it before they swore Fealty to King Stephen, though upon false Suggestions: However, the Pope knew he was chosen by the Guidance of Divine Grace, and the Bishops and Nobility believed him to be infallible; or, at least, had such a D ference to his Confirmation of Stephen, that they took themselves to be discharged and released f●om their Oaths made to Maud; for if this Confirmation was valid, her Title was made null and void.  

Ma●msb. f. 108. a.n. 40, 50.  That such as favoured Stephen, owned his Title from the Pope, it is evident from his Brother the Legat's Speech (who left Stephen, and adhered to Maud; and then revolted from her, to him again,) when he called a Council at Westminster by his Legantine Power, wherein chiding Letters from the Pope were read, because he had not delivered his Brother Stephen, then in Prison; in which he was exhorted to do it, either by Ecclesiastical or Secular Power: After the reading whereof, he made a Speech in excuse of his faithless Actions, and commanded those present, on behalf of God and the Pope, (ex parte Dei & Apostolici) that they should aid the King with their utmost Power, who was anointed by the Will of the People, and Assent of the Apostolic See, (voluntate populi, & assensu Ap●stolicae sedis inunctum) and to excommunicate all Perturbers of the Peace, that favoured the Duchess of Anjou, i. e. Maud.  
If the Author had understood this, he would scarcely have ventured upon this Instance, to have confirmed his Opinion about the Release and Discharging of Oaths.    

The Words of the Author, p. 23.  
Secondly, That upon the Agreement between King Stephen and Henry II. M●●d herself was set aside, and Stephen was to continue King for his Life, and Henry II. to succeed him. Now, if Oaths of Allegiance must not be interperted by the public Good, here are insuperable Difficulties as to the Obligations of these Oaths, for the Allegiance was transferred from the right Heir, to an Usurper; as Stephen must be owned to have been by th●se who deny that Allegiance can be transferred from the right Heir: And they must continue Allegiance to the Usurper for his Life, which is repugnant to the nature of our Constitution, if it be founded in a Line● and Legal Succession. And again, Maud, to whom they had sworn, is set aside, and the Reversion of the Crown it entailed on her Son, although she was living.  

What may be replied to this.  
The insuperable Difficulties have been overcome before in the Discourse about the Pope's Confirmation of King S●ephen: As to Maud's having been set aside, it shall be considered in the last Paragraph of this Instance, and also something more said of this Public Good, which brought on this Agreement, and what it was; but it must needs be so, because done by the Common-Council of the Nation.    

The Author's Words in the same Page.  

A. 1153. Paris, ibid.  Matt. Westm. and Paris say, The Right of King Henry II. was declared by King Stephen, in conventu Episcoporum, & aliorum de regno Optimatum; which was the D●scription of a Parliament at that time, for as yet the Baronage represented the Nation; which shows how far the public Good was thought to be the Measure of the Obligation of these Oaths. G●● Newburge●sis saith, 
L. 1. c. 30.  the B●num publicum was the Foundation of this Agreement: 
A. 1153.  And M. Westminster, that the King and Lords did all swear to it, and a solemn Charter was made of it, and kept in a most secure place.  

HISTORY.  

M. W stm. A. D. 1153 f. 246. n. 10  Diligentia Theobaldi Archiepiscopi Cantuartensi, & Episcoporum r●gni Rex Anglorum Stephanus, & D x N●●mannorum H●nricus, apud Wa●ingford talem concordiam inierunt, etc. By the D ligence of Theobald Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishops of the Kingdom the following Agreement was made between King Stephen, and Henry Duke of Normandy, at Walingford. 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 co firmed, that the King him elf, and the Bishops then present, with the rest of the best Men of the Kingdom, swore that Duke Henry, after the Death of the King, if he should outlive him, should enjoy the Kingdom, without all Contradiction: O● which Agreement there was a Charter made, which was kept in a most secure place. 
Ibid. n. 20.   
This is what the Historian hath, in both places, cited by the Author. The whole Charter is in Brompton, 
Brompton, col. 1037. n. 60.  and gins thus: Stephanus R●x Angliae, Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Comitibus, Justitiariis, Vicecomitibus, B●ronibus, & omnibus fidelibus, suis salutem: Sciatis, quod Ego Rex Stephanus Henricum Ducem Norman●●ae post me Successorem regni Angliae, & hae edem meum j●re haereditario constitus, & sic e: & haeredibus suis regnum Ang iae donavi & consi●mavi: D●x vero propter hunc honorem, & Donationem & Confirmationem, sibi a me factam, Homagio michi & Sacramento securitatem fecit, scilicet q●od fidelis m●chi erit. & vitam & hon●rem meum pro suo posse custodiet, per Conv●ntiones inter nos praeloc●tas quae in hac Charta continentur. Stephen, King of England, &c Know ye, that I have appointed Henry Duke of Normandy, Successor of the Kingdom of England after me, and my Heir by hereditary Righ●; and so have given and confirmed the Kingdom of England to him and his Heirs: For which Honour, Donation and Confirmation made by me to him, he gave me Security by Homage and Oath, that he would be faithful to me, and preserve my Life and Honour to the utmost of his power, according to the Agreements made by us, which are contained in this Charter. Neubrigensis speaking of this Treaty, says, 
L. 1. c 30. p. 104. In Paris, Ed. 1610.  P●acu●t inter eos (that is, the King and Duke) solemn & salubre colleq●ium celebrari, ubi amicis mediantibus, & circa bonum publicum pia & prudenti provisione satagentibus, p●x inter eos & caute formata, &  firmata est. T●ey agreed to have a solemn and wholesome Treaty, where, by the Mediation of Friends, having a pious and prudent respect to the common Good, a Peace was warily made, and solidly confirmed. 
Ibidem, p. 105.  Quibus Deo propitio sal●briter acts, Rex Angliam, & Anglia pacem recepit: annis enim jamplurimis, fere nudo regis nomine insignis, tunc recipere visus est hujus rem nominis; & quasi tunc primo regnare coepit, quia tunc primo purgata Invasionis, Tyrannica macula, legitimi principis justitiam induit. Which things being done by God's Assistance, the King received England, and England received Peace; for having had the bare name of King for many Years, now he enjoyed the thing itself, and began then first to reign because then the Blot of Tyrannical Invasion being first wiped out, he exercised the Justice of a lawful King.    

The Author's further Words about this Accord, p. 22.  
And thus the Oaths of Allegiance were continued to one that had no Right, for his Life; and made to one who predended to no R ght, but after his Mother, who was set aside in this Agreement; for we never read that she was present at the Agreement, or resigned her Right to the Crown. So that here were three Oaths of Allegiance at once; that to Maud the Empress, that to King Stephen, and to Henry II. and yet the general Good of the Nation must give an equitable Sense of these Oaths, or there must be Perjury on all sides.  

The Answer to what the Author says, about this Agreement, and the Exclusion of Maud, etc.  
By this Accord it was owned by King Stephen, Bishops and Barons, which were then the Parliament, or Colloquium, as the Author confesseth, that th● hereditary Right was in Duke Henry, and he granted that King Stephen, during his Life, should peaceably enjoy his Kingdom. And if the Right was in Henry, might he not recede from it if he pleased? And the Agreement says, he did during Stephen's Life. This Retrocession made the Bishops and Barons Oaths to the Agreement lawful; and if he had not some testimony of a Session, or Resignation, by and from his Mother, though not mentioned in the Agreement, this Convention could not, upon Stephen's Acknowledgement only, have owned his hereditary Right upon Oath. And that by Session, or some other way, she did quit and leave her Right to govern, to her Son, 'tis most probable, from what follows. M●nd the Empress, 
Malm●b. f. 104. a.n. 10.  upon the death of her Father, and the Invasion of Stephen, on the 30●h of September, in the Year 1139, came into England with her Brother Robert, and managed the War against him in her own Person, her Son being but a Child, 
He was born, A.D. 1133.  and her Husband engaged in the Defence of Normandy, Anjon, etc. against the King of France. Her three great Supports were, her half Brother Robert Earl of Gloucester, Ranulph Earl of Chester, and Milo Earl of Hereford; the last, 
Chaon. Gervas'. Col. 1359. n. 10, Col. 1361. n. 10. Col. 1362. n. 10. lin. 1.  to her very great Grief, died in the Year 1143. the second made his Peace with King Stephen, 1145. and the first, Robert Earl of Gloucester, died in the beginning of November, in the Year 1146. of an high Fever, after he had sent Henry, then being about thirteen Years of Age, over to his Father, into Normandy.  
After the loss of these Friends and Supports, the Empress, 
Ibidem, Col. 1363. lin. 1.  wearied out with these Commotions and Wars in England, before Lent, in the Year 1147. passed over into Normandy, choosing rather to live there with her Husband in Peace, than undergo so many Troubles.  
In the Year 1149. 
Ibidem, Col. 1366. n. 30. Col. 1367. n 30. Chr. Norm. f. 984 B.C. A. D 1150 M W●stin. eod. An.  Henry came into England with an Army, in the Month of May; and returned into No●mandy in the beginning of January next following, without Success.  
In the Year 1150. Henry took possession of his Mother's Inheritance, (haereditatem matris,) the Dukedom of Normandy, and did Homage to Lew●s King of France, for it; his Father Geoffrey being present both when he took Possession, and did Homage; and they returned together from Paris rejoicing; and no doubt, if they two were so well pleased with what had been done, the Mother could not be dissatisfied, nor could it be done without her Consent.  

Ibidem, D. A. D. 1150  On the 7th of September his Father Geoffrey died, and gave to Henry D●ke of Normandy, his eldest Son, the Earldom of Anjou. Henrico Duci Normanniae, primogenito suo concessit Comitatam Andegavensem.  

Chr. Geru. Col. 1372. n. 30. The old Historians began the Y●ar at Christmas.  In the Year 1153. Duke Henry, all things being quiet beyond Sea, came with some Forces into England, on the 1st of January: His Coming was not sooner known, but the Earls and great Men flocked to him; and upon the 8th of the same Month, the Year following, the Agreement was made between King S ephen and Duke Henry. Matth. Westminster says it was made A. D. 1153.  

Chr. Norm. f 1101. D A. D. 1166  From the time Maud the Empress left England, in the Year 1147 she is not so much as mentioned by any Historian, until the time of her death, which was on the 4th of the Ideses, or 10th of September, 1166.  
From these Particulars 'tis most probable, if not certain, that she was satisfied with, and consented to this Agreement, either at the time it was made, or by Session from the Kingdom and Government, by relinquishing it, and leaving the who●e Management to her Son, who was now Duke of Normandy, Earl of Anjou, 
Ibid. f. 985. C.  and, in Right of his Wife Alienor, Duke of Aquitain; and being now above twenty Years of Age, fit for Action. When he came for England, she was in her declining Age, her Years being then about fifty; and fixing her Mind upon Works of Charity, she spent the rest of her Days in performing of them; 
Ib. f. 1101. D.  for she built three Monasteries in Normandy; one of Cistersians, in the Country of Caux; another of Canons, near Cherburgh; and a third of Canons, in the Forest of Goser; and for the building of the Stone Bridge of Rhoven, over the River Seyn, which had been begun by her, she gave a great Sum of Money. She was a Woman of a very brisk and high Spirit, as appears by her Actions in England; and after she left it, she lived nineteen Years, and twelve or thirteen after her Son was King: So as, if she had not relinquished her Right to England, as she had done about three Years before this Agreement, to Normandy, the Historians could not have been so silent concerning her.  
So that from hence 'tis evident, that such as had taken the three Oaths were safe; for, upon Ma●d's Session, or relinquishing her Right, the Obligation of the Oath made to her ceased. Then the Oath made to Stephen, seeing it was done by the Consent of Henry, who had the Right, became lawful. And thirdly, The●e can be no Scruple about the Legality of the Oath made to H nry, who, upon the Session of his Mother, had the hereditary Right; and this is suggested and owned in the Agreement.  
But the Author says, The general Good of the Nation must give an equitable Sense of these Oaths, or there must be Perjury on all sides. What could this general Good then be? It could not be the Public of the Nation in a true sense, for the Bu●k and Body of the People were English Saxons; (for though the Normans had taken away their Estates, and made them Slaves, as appears by Dooms-day-Book, and the black Book in the Exchequer, yet we read not that they massacred or murdered them.) And what general Good did they receive by, or what equitable Sense did, or could, what was general Good to them, give to the Normans Oaths? For all the Bishops and Noblemen that took these Oaths, were Normans: All the Bishops, Earls and Barons, that were Witnesses to the Instrument of Agreement, and swore to it, in number thirty seven, were Normans, except Geoffrey of Monmuth, a Welshman, or Britain, than Bishop of St. Asaph. 
That England was an Habitation of Strangers, (meaning the Normans,) and governed by Foreigners. Malms. f. 52. a. n. 40.  Malm●bury wrote at this time, and says, when he wrote, there was no natural Englishman a Duke; that is, a great, or leading Man, a Bishop, or an Abbot; all sorts of Outlandish-men devoured the Riches and Bowels of England, nor was there any hopes this Misery would have an end. Anglia facta est exterorum habitatio, & alieniginarum dominatio; nullus hodie Anglus, vel Dux, vel Pontifex, vel Abbas. Advenae quique divitias & viscera corrodunt Angliae, nec ulla spes finiendae miseriae. And in another place, speaking of the Battle of Hastings, he says, 
Ibid. f 57 a. n. 30.  That was the fatal Day to the English, the lamentable Destruction of his sweet Country, by its receiving new Lords and Masters. Illa fuit dies fatalis Anglis, funestum excidium dulcis patriae pro novorum Dominorum commutatione.  
Let the Author tell the World, how the general Good of a Nation that were miserable People, and Slaves, could give an equitable Sense of their Conquerors, and cruel domineering Masters Oaths. Let him show how the general Good of any Nation can give an equitable Sense to the Oaths of such Men who were educated in Perjury, Rapine, Murder, and and all sorts of Barbarities and Wickedness; whose Gain and Advantage was the Measure of all their Actions. In the Year 1104, or 1105, notwithstanding all the great Normans had swore Fealty to their true and lawful Duke Robert, yet when Henry came from England with good store of Money, they ran after him, and delivered to him Castles and fortified Towns. 
Eadmer. f. 80. lin. 1. A D. 1104. Hoved. f. 289 b. n. 30 A. D. 1105  Anno millesimo centesimo quinto, Rex Anglorum Henricus transiit mare, omnes autem pene majores-Normannorum ad ejus adventum, spreto comite Domino suo, cui fidelitatem juraverant, in aurum & argentum regis, quod ipse de Anglia portaverat cucurrerunt, eique castra munitasque civitatis tradiderunt.  
It was the way in Normandy, and from thence brought hither, when any Earl or great Man found himself grieved by another, injured, or highly affronted, they frequently got together all their Men at Arms, their other Tenants, and poor Dependants, and as much Assistance from their Friends and Confederates as they could, and burned one another's Castles or Houses, destroyed their Lands and small Territories, and carried away the Inhabitants Prisoners. The Norman Histories abound with these Stories. Ordericus Vitalis, in the Lives of Rufus, Henry I. and this King Stephen especially, hath many Relations of such inhuman Ravages. And even at this very time, the Norman Commanders and Soldiers, and other Foreigners, as well of Maud's, as Stephen's Party, practised the same Barbarities in this Nation: The Country, or Husbandmen, such as ploughed and sowed, such as cultivated Towns and Villages, and the Inhabitants thereof, were given to the Soldiers as their Wages, and were sold with their Goods and Substance. 
Contin. ad Flor. Wig. f. 672.  Militibus in stipendium dantur, & venunduntur, vicorum & villarum cultores & habitatores, cum rebus suis universis, ac substantiis. 
Cambden. Brit f. 199 200.  In this King's Reign there were in England so many Tyrants, as there were Lords of Castles; and many Flemings and Britain's flocked to him from beyond Sea, who were accustomed to live by plundering, that came into England in expectation of geat Booty. 
Malmsb. fol. 105. a. n. 20.  Sub Stephano plures ex Flandria & Britannia, rapto vivere assueti, spe magnarum praedarum Angliam involabant. England was then made a Prey to all Invaders and Villains.  
But the Author tells us, that the general Good of these inhuman People did give an equitable Sense to the Oaths then taken. If it were not as he says, there must be Perjury on all sides; for those who had first sworn to Maud, could not transfer their Allegiance on any other Account, (that is, of the general Good, etc.) either to Stephen, or Henry II. during her Life. What was thought of the Perjury of those Times, and especially of the Perjury of his three Bishops, (who were all N●rmans,) which the Author calls transferring of Allegiance, will be evident from the following Testimonies.  

f. 221. a. n. 5.  Henry Archdeacon of H●ntington, who lived and written at this time, and continued his H st●ry only unto the Year 1154, tells his Readers, That in Succession of the most flagitious time, in which the Rage of the Norman Fury appeared, whatsoever Henry h●d d●ne tyrannically, or royally, in comparison of worse things, seemed to have been the best; for immediately upon his death, Stephen, (Vir magnae strenuitatis & audac●●e,) a Man of great Confidence and Boldness, though he had sworn Fealty to the Daughter of King H nry, (fretus tamen vigore & imp dentia,) furnished with R● olution and Impudence, (regna d●●●●ma D●um tenta●s invasit,) tempting God, 
〈◊〉 6. lin. 1, etc.  invaded the Crown. But alas! Will iam Archbishop of Canterbury, who fi●st made Oath to the Daughter of Henry, crowned him; for which Act, God appointed the same Judgement for him, which he had done to the High Priest Jeremias, (●hat is to say,) that he should not live a ●●a● after. 
Gul. Neub. l. 1. c 4 p. 18, 19  Cum ergo, ut praedictum est, ●ex ld ●ricus ob●●sset idem Stephanus Sacrament●● q ●● fi●●ae ejus de conservanda fi●●tate p●aesticerat, p aevaricator regn●m arripuit. Therefore, as hath b en said, when King Henry died, Stephen b●●ke his Oath of Fealty made to his Daught r, and seized the Kingdoms; the Bishops and great Men, that were bound by the same O●th, giving their Assi ance: Archiepiscopus q●idem, e●usd●m (ut creditur) perjuria merito, ipso pr●varicationas anno defecit: And truly the Archbishop, as it was believed, for the same C●me of Perjury left the World within a Year. 
Ibid. p. 19  Stephanus ergo. ut contra jus humanum pariter & divin●m; humanum sc●●icet, quia legitimus heres non erat; & divinum, id est violata jurisjurandi religione, sublimaretur in regem; pactus est quaecunque praesules & proceres exigere voluerunt. Stephen therefore, because he was made King against both humane and divine Laws; humane, as not being the lawful Heir; divine, as having violated his Oath; promised and agreed to do whatsoever the Bishops and Great Men exacted of him.  
As to Roger Bishop of Sa●isbury, if we may believe Malmsbury, he swore to Maud what ●he never intended to perform. The Testimony is from what the Hi●orian heard him say: 
Malmsb. f 99 b. n. 10.  Ego Rogerium Sa●esberiensem Episcopum saep●e aud●vi dicentem, solutum se a Sacramento, quod Imperatrici fecerat, etc. I have often heard R her Bishop of Salisbury say, he was free from the O●th he had made to the Empress because he made it upon condition that the King should not marry his Daughter to a Stranger, out of the Kingdom. Nec vero haec ita dixerim, quod credam vera fuisse verba hominus, qui se unicu●que tempori, pro volubilitate fortunae accommodare nosset Neither have I said these things, that I b lief the M●n's Words to be true, who knew how to comply with all Times, and accommodate himself to every Turn of Fortune. This Roger was an illiterate P●iest, 
Gul. Neub. l. 1. c. 6.  who got his Living by his saying M ss in the Suburbs of Caen, in Norma●dy. King Henry took him to be his Chaplain, because he was ready at his Office, and a cunning, crafty Man, and promoted him to the Bishopric of Sa●●b●●y; and not only so, but committed to him the public Administration of Secular Affairs:  esset non tantum in Ecclesia magnus, sed etiam in regno a rege secundus: So as he was not only great in the Church, but second, or next to the King, in the Kingdom. Sed r●ge defuncto, 
Ibid.  qui ei tantae in seculo claritatis author extiterat, circa legitimos ej●s haeredes infid●s; ut Stephanum sacramento illo aeque astrictum alliceret, non est veritus incurrere perjurium, ver●m etiam aliis insigne pej●●andi praestruxit exemplum. But the King being dead, who had made him so glorious in the World, he proved unfaithful to his lawful Heirs; that he might please Stephen, who was bound by the same Oath, did not only commit Perjury himself, but became a famous Example to others to do the like.  
As to the Third, Henry Bishop of W●nchester, the Pope's Legate, who was first m●de Abbot of G●astenbury, and then p omoted to that See by King Henry. There needs no more to be said of him, than that he first swore to be true to Maud, and to maintain her Title after her Father's death; yet used all the Endeavour that he could, to set up his Brother Stephen, by making the Clergy (who then ruled all) for him, and then swore to be true to him. When Stephen was beaten, and made Prisoner by Maud, he lef● him, and swore again to Maud; and when he was at liberty, he left Maud, and made Oath of Fealty to him again, and continued Pope's Legate all the time.  
The Conclusion of the Answer to this Instance shall be, the Judgement and Opinion of Mr. Pryn in this very Case in his Concordia Discors, 
P. 33, 34.  first printed 1659. and reprinted, 1683. The perfidious Violation of the Oath made to Maud, in crowning Stephen after King H●nrys death, brought exemplary Judgements on the wilful Violators thereof, and a bloody, long, lasting, Civil War, within the Bowels of the Realm, between Maud, her Son Henry, and the Usurper Stephen, to the great Oppression, Devastation and Desolation of the Public and People, as our Hi● orians observe: 
Hollinshed, v. 3. f. 46.  All the Good they hoped for, by disinheriting Maud, and crowning Stephen, upon their own Terms, against his own, and their Oaths, becoming void and null by his Perfidiousness, through Divine Justice, which will never permit any good things to spring out of such enormous Evils as Perjury and Treachery; which produced sundry Judgements, and Civil Wars; never ceasing, till Henry, the right Heir, was restored to the Crown by a friendly Agreement; the only probable speedy way now, to end our present Wars, oppressions, distractions, Military Government, and restore Peace and Prosperity in our Nations.  
As to his Instance about Oaths taken during the Controversies between the Houses of York and Lancaster, a true Transcript of the Parliament-Rolls will be the b●st and plainest Answer; which here follows.  
Memorand. that the xuj day of Octobre, 
Rot. Parl. 39 H. 6. n. 10.  the ix day of this present Parliament, The counsel of the right high, and mighty Prince, Richard Duc of York, brought into the Parliament chambre a Writing, conteigning the cleyme and title of the right, that the said Duc pretended unto the Coro●es of Englond, and of France, and Lordship of Ireland, and the same Writing delivered to the right reverend fadre in God George Bishop of Exc●stre, Chancellor of Eng●ond, desiring him that ●he same writing might be opened to the Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx assembled in this present Parliament, A●d that the said D●c might have brief and exp dient answer thereof; wheruppon the said Chancellor opened and showed the said desire to the Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx, ask the Ques' ion of them whether they would the said writing should be openly radde before them or no. To the which Question it was answered and agreed by all the said Lords. Inasmuch as every person high and low, saying to this high Court of Parliament must be herd, and his desire and petition understand, that the said writing should be radde and herd, not to be answered without the King's Commandment, for so much as the matter is so high, and of so  ●●ght and poise, which writing there than was radde; The tenor whereof followeth in these words: It is not to be forgotten, 
n. 11.  etc. as in Numb. 19 followeth.  
And afterward the xvij day of Octobre, 
n. 12.  the x day of this present Parliament, the said Chancellor showed and declare to the said Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx, being in the same Parliament, how that the counsel of the said Duc of York greatly desired to have answer of such writing, as upon the xuj day of Octobre last passed was put into this present Parliament, on the behalf of the said Duc; and thereupon asked the said Lords what they thought was to be done in that m●tier. To the which Question it was answered and thought by all the said Lords, That the matter was so high, and of such might, that it was not to eny of the King's Subgenus to enter into communication thereof, without his high commandment, agreement, and assent had thereto. And fe●th●rmore forasmuch as the said D●c desired and required brief and un●●●aied answer of the said wryteing, and in eschneing and avoiding of g●ete and manifold inconveniences, that weren likely to ensue, if hastily provision of good answer in that behalf were not had; it was thought and agreed by all the Lords, that they all should go unto the King to declare and open the said matter unto h●s Highness, and to understand what his good G●ace would to be done se ther therein. And the upon incontinent all the said Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx went unto the King's high p●e●ence, and thereunto opened and declared the said mat●er by the mouth of his said Chancellor of England; and the said mateer by the King's Highness herd and conceyved, It pleased him to pray and command all the se●d Lords, that they should s●che for to found, in as m●ch as in them was, all such things as m●ght be objecte and laid anent the cleyme a●● title of the said Duc. And the said L●rdes b●●aught the King, that he would remember him, if he might find eny reasonable matter that might be objected against the said cleym and title, in so much as his said Highness had seen and understonden many divers writings and Chronicles; wheruppon on the morn, the xviij day of Octobre, the xj day of this present Parliament, the foreseid Lords sent for the King's Justices into the Parlement-chambre, to have their Avis and Counseill in this behalf; and there delivered to them the writing of the cleyme of the said Duc, and in the King's name gave them straitely in commandment, sadly to take avisament therein, And to serche and find all such objections, as might be laid against the same in fortifying of the King's right.  
Whereunto the same Justices, the Monday, the xx day of Octobre than next ensuing, for their answer upon the said writing to them delivered seiden, that they were the King's Justices, and have to determine such matiers as come before them in the Law; between party and party they mey not be of Counseill: An● sigh this matter was between the King and the said Duc of York as two pa●ties, and also it hath not be accustomed to call the Justices to Counseill in such matiers; and in especial the matter was so high, and touched the King's high Estate and Regalie, which is above the law, and passed their learning, wherefore they durst not enter into eny communication thereof, for it pertained to the Lords of the King's blood, and thapparage of this his land, to have communication and meddle in such matiers; And therefore they humble by sought all the Lords, to have them utterly excused of any avyce or counsel by them to be yeven in that matter.  
And then the said Lords considering the answer of the said Juges, and intending to have the avice and good counsel of all the K ng's Counse●llours, sent for all the King's Sergeau●ts, and Attournay, and gave theym strait commandment in the King's name, that they sadly and avisely should serche and seek all such things, as might be best and strongest to be allegged for the King's avail, in objection and deferring of the said title and cleyme of the said Duc.  
Whereunto the said sergeants and Attorney, the Wednesday than next ensuring, answered and seiden, that the said matter was put unto the King's Justices, and how the Monday last passed the same Justices seiden, and declared to the said Lo●des, that the said matter was ●oo high, and of so great wight, that it passed their learning; and also they durst not enter eny communication in that matter, to yeve any avyce or counsel therein: And sith that the said matter was so high, that it passed the learning of the Justices, it must needs exceed their learning; and also they durst not enter eny communication in that matter, and prayed and besought all the Lord●s to have them excused of yeving eny avyce or counsel therein.  
To whom it was answered, by the aavies of all the Lords, by the s●●d chancellor, that they might not so be excused, for they were the K●ng's particular Couns●illers, and therefore th●y had their fees and wages: And as to that the said sergeants and Attorney seiden, that they were the King's Counsaillers in the Law, in such things as were under his authority, or ●y Commission; but this mat●er was above his auct●●ite, wherein they might not meddle, and humbly besought the said Lords to have them excused of yeving eny counsel in that matter: and it was answered them again, that the Lords would not hold them excused, but let the King's Highness have knowledge what they said; and theruppon the said chancellor remembered the Lords Spirituelx and T●mperelx of the seying and excuses of the Justices, and seying and excuses of the sergeants and Attorney, and also the  commandment of the King's Highness, that they had, to find all such objections, as might be moost mighty to defend the King's right and title, and to defeat the title and cleyme of the said Duke of York; And also that the King might understond, that the said Lord's diden their true and faithful devoir and acquittal in the said matter, desired all the Lords that every of them should say what he cowed say in fortifying the King's title, and in defeteing of the cleyme of the said Duc: And than it was agreed by all the Lords, that every Lord should have his freedom to say wh●t he would say, without eny reporting or maugre to be had for his saying; And theruppon after the seiing of all the Lords every after other, It was concluded that thes matiers and articles, here undrewriten, should be alegged and objecte against the said cleyme and title of the said Duc.  
First, It is thought, 
Objectio contra titulum praedictum.  that the Lords of this Lond must needs call to their remembrances, the  oaths the which they have made to the King our Sovereign Lord, the which may be laid to the said Due of York; and that the Lords may not break th●o oaths.  
Item. It is thought also, that it is to be called to remembrance the  and notable Acts of Parlements, made in divers Parlements of divers of the King's Progeni●●urs, The which Acts be sufficient and reasonable to be l●yd again the title of the said Duc of York. The which Acts been of moche more authority than eny Chronicle, And also of authority to defeat eny manner of title be made to eny person.  
Item, It is thought, that there is to be laid again the s●id title divers entaills made to the heirs males, as for the Corone of Englond, as it may appear by divers Chronicles and Parlements.  
Item, It is thought, if the said Duc should make eny title or cleyme by the Line of Sir Leonell, that the same Duc should bear the Arms of the same leonel, and not the Arms of Edmund Langley, late Duc of York.  
Item, It is to be allegged again the title of the said Duc, that the time that King Herry the fourth took upon him the Corone of Englond, he said he entered and took upon him the Corone as right enheriter to King Herry the third, and not as a Conqueror.  
To the which Articles the said Duc of York gave his answers in writing as followen.  

Responsiones praefati Ducis ad Objectiones tituli sui praedicti.  Here under followen the answers of Richard Plantagenet, called commonly Duc of York, etc. to certain raisins and colours alleged, as it is said, against the matter of his right and title, etc.  
First, Where it is said, that it is thought, 
n. 14.  that the Lords must needs call to their remembrance the  Oaths which they have made to the King, which may be leid to the said Duc, and that they may not break thoo oaths.  
The said Richard answereth and saith, that every man, under the pain of everlasting damnation, is bound to obey to the law and commandments of God, by the which law and commandments troth and justice own to be preferred and observed, and untrouth and injustice laid apart and repressed, and so it is that of this bond, and duty of obedience to Godd's law, no man may discharge himself by his own deed or act, promise or oath, for  of the contrary would ensue innumerable inconveniences; wherefore sigh it is so, that the matter of the title and cleyme of the said Richard Plantagenet is openly true, and lawful, and grounded upon evident troth and justice; It followeth, that man should have rather consideration to troth, right and justice in this matter accordingly with the will of the law of God, then to any promise or oath made by him to the contrary, considered namely that by the law and determination of holy Church an oath made by oo● person unto the prejudice or hurt of an other, contrary to troth, justice and charity, in the which standeth the plenitude and perfection of Godd's law, is void and of noon effect, neither in eny wise obligatory; And that the virtue and nature of an oath is to confirm troth, and in no wise to impugn it; And over that by the oath of feaute, homage, or ligeance, no man is bounden to any inconvenient or unlawful thing; And how be it that this answer is ●uffisaunt to all manner objections that may be made against his cleyme and intent in this party by reason or occasion of any oath, yet natheless the said Richard, for as much as the matter of oaths is a matter spiritual, for more declaration of his conscience, honesty and troth in this party, offereth himself ready to answer b●fore any Juge Spirituell, competent in place, and time covenable to all manner of men, that any thing wool purpose against him in that behalf.  
And to show clearly, that lawfully withouten offence of God and conscience he may cleyme and pursue his right, and desire Justice, in such form as he doth, and that all other people, and namely the Peers and Lords of this Ream may, and by the law of God and man ought to help, and assist him in troth and justice, notwithstanding any oath of feaute, or other by him or them here before made.  
Over this, where it is thought also, 
n. 15.  that it is to be called to remembrance the  and notable Acts of Parliament, made in dyvers Parlements of dyvers of the King's progenitors, the which acts been sufficient to be laid against the title of the said Duc, and of more authority than eny Chronicle, And alsoe of authority to defeat any manner title made to eny person.  
And also where 'tis said, that it is to be laid against the se●●e title dyvers entailles made to the heirs males, as for the Corone of Englond, as it may appear by divers Chronicles and Parlements,  
The s●id Richard Plantagin●t answereth and saith, that in troth there been no such acts and tailles made by eny Parliament herebefore, as it is surmised, but only in the vijth year of King Herry the fourth a certain act and ordinance was made in a Parliament, by him called, wherein he made the Realms of england and F●aunce, amongst others, to be unto him, and to the heirs of his body coming, and to his iiij sons, and the heirs of their body's coming, in manner and form as it appeareth in the same act; And if he might have obtained and rejoysed the said Corones, etc. by title of inheritance, descent, or succession, he neither needed, nor would have desired, or m●de them to be granted to him in such wise, as they be by the said act, The which taketh no place, nother is of eny force or effect against him, that is right enheritor of the said Corones, as it accordeth with Godd's law, and all natural laws; how it be that all other acts and ordinances made in the said Parliament, and sithence been good and s●ffisant against all other people.  

n. 16.  Item, Where it is thought, that if the said Duc should make any title or cleyme by the line of Sir Leonell, he should bear the Arms of the same Sir Leonell, and not the Arms of Edmund Langley late Duc of Y●●k.  
The said Duc answereth, and saith, that troth is, he might lawfully have borne the Arms of the said Sir Leonell here bisore, and also the same Arms that King Edward the third bare, that is to say the Arms of the Reaumes of Englond and of France, but he abstained of bearing of the said Arms, like as he absteigned for the t●me of purposing, and pursuing of his right and title, etc. for causes not inknowen to all this Reaume; for though right for a time rest, and be put to silence, yet it roteth not, ne'er shall not perish.  

n. 17.  Item, Where it is alleged against the title of the said Duc, that the said Herry of Derby, at such time as he took upon him the Corone of Englond, said, that he entered and took the same Corone upon him as right inheritor to King Herry the third, and not as a Conqueror.  
The said Duc thereto saith, that such saying of the said King Herry the fourth may in no wise be true, and that the contrary thereof, which is troth, shall be largely enough showed, approved, and justefyed by sufficiaunt authority, and matter of record: And over that, that his said saying, was oonly to shadow, and colour fraudulently his said unrightwyse, and violent usurpation, And by that moyen to abuse deceyvably the people standing about him.  
Item, The Saturday, 
n. 18.  the xvij day of this present Parliament, it was showed unto the Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx, being in this present Parliament, by the mouth of the said chancellor, that the said Duc of York called besily, to have hasty and speedy answer of such matiers, as touched his title aboveseid; And how that for as much as it is thought by all the Lords, that the title of the said Duc cannot be defeted; and in eschewing of the  inconvenients that may ensue, a mean was found to save the King's honour and estate, and to appease the said Duc if he would, which is this; That the King shall keep the Corones, and his ●state, and dignity royal, during his life, and the said Duc, and his heirs, to succeed him in the same; Exhorting and stirring all the said Lords, that if eny of them cowde find eny other or better mean, that it might be showed; whereupon after sad and ripe communication in this matter had, it was concluded and agreed by all the said Lords, that sigh it was so, that the title of the said Duc of York cannot be defeted, and in eschewing the  inconvenients that might ensue, to take the mean above-rehersed, The oaths that the said Lords had made unto the King's Highness at Coventre, and other places saved, and their consciences therein cleared; and over that it was agreed by the said Lords, that the said mean should be opened and declared to the King's Highness: And forthwith they went towards the King, where he was in his Chambre, within his palace of Westminster; and in their going out of the Parlement-chambre, the said chancellor asked of the said Lords, that sigh it was so, that the said mean should be opened by his mouth to the King's good Grace, if they would abide by him howsoever that the King took the matter, and all they answered and said, Ye.  
All these premises thus showed and opened to the King's Highness, he inspired with the grace of the Holy ghost, and in eschuying of effusion of Christien blood, by good and sad deliveration, and avyce had with all his Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx, condescended to accord to be made between him, and the said Duc, and to be authorized by th'authority of this present Parliament; The tenor of which accord hereafter ensueth in manner and form following.  

Concordia facta inter Regem & p aefatum D●cem. n. 19  Blessed be Jesus, in who's hand and bounty resteth, and is the pease and unitee betwixt Princes, and the weal of every Reaume; thurgh who's direction agreed it is, appointed, and accorded as followeth, Betwixt the moost mighty Prince, King H●rry the sixth, King of Englond, and of France, and Lord of Irelond, on that oon party; and the right high, and mighty Prince, Richard Plantagenet, Duc of York, on that other party, upon certain matiers of variance moeved betwixt them, and in especial upon the cleyme and title unto the Corones of Englond, and of France, and royal power, estate, and dignity apperteigning to the same, and Lordship of Irelond, opened, showed, and declared by the said Duc afore all the Lords Spirituelx and Temperelx, being in this present Parliament, The said agreement, appointment, and accord to be auctorised by the same Parliament.  

This is the same verbatim with the Writing put in●o the Parliament, n. 11.  First, Where the said Richard Duc of York hath declared, and opened as above, his said 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, the XV Kalends of Juyll, in the Vigil of St. Marc and Mercellian, the year of our Lord MCCXXXIX. and Edmund his second Son, which was borne on St. Marcell day, the year of our Lord MCCXLV. The which Edward, af●er the death of the said King Herry his Fader, entitled and called King Edward the first, had Issue Edward his fir●● begotten Son, entitled and called, after the decease of the said first Edward his fader, King Edward the second; which had Issue, and leefully gate the right noble, and honourable Prince, Edward the third, the true and undoubted King of Englond, and of France, and Lord of Irelond; 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, Prince of Wales, William Hatfeld second begotten, Leonell third begotten Duc of Clarence, John of Gaunt fourth begotten Duc of Lancaster, Edmund Langley fi●●h gotten Duc of York, Thomas W d●stoke sixth gotten Duc of Glove, and William Windsor the seventh gotten; The said Edward Prince of W●●es, which died in the life of the said Edward King, had Issue and leefully gate Richard, the which succeeded the same Edward King, his Grauntfi●e, in royal Dignity, entitled and called King Richard the second, and died without Issue. William Hatfeld, the second goten son of the said Edward King, died without Issue. Leonell, the third goten son of the same Edward King, D●c of Clarence, had Issue, and leefully gate Ph●lippe his only daughter and heir, which by the Sacrament of Matrimony coupled unto Edmund Mortymer Earl of March, had Issue, and leefully bore R●ger Mortymer earl of March, his son and hei●e; which Roger Earl of March had Issue, and le●fully gate Edmond earl of March, Roger Mortymer, Anne, and Alianore; which Edmund, Roger, and Alianore died without Issue, and the said Anne under the Sacrament of Matrimony coupled unto Richard Earl of Cambrigge, the son of the said Edmund Langley, the fift gotten son of the said King Edward, as it is afore specified, had Issue, and leefully bare Richard Plantagenet, commonly called Duc of York: The said John of Gaunt, the fourth goten son of the said King Edward, and the younger Brother of the said Leonell, had Issue, and leefully gate Henry earl of Derby, which incontinent, after the time that the said King Richard resigned the Corones of the said Reaumes, and the said Lordship of Irelond, unrightwisely entered upon the same, then bey on live Edmund Mortymer Earl of March, son to Roger Mortymer Earl of March, son and heir of the said Phelippe, daughter and heir of the said Sir Leonell, the third son of the said King Edward the third; to the which Edmund the right and title of the said Corones and Lordship by law and custom belonged.  
To the which Richard Duc of York, as son to Anne, daughter to Roger Mortymer Earl of March, son and heir to the said Phelippe, daughter and heir to the said Leonell, the third goten son of the said King Edward the third, the right title, dignity royal, and estate of the Corones of the Reaumes of Englond, and of France, and of the Lordship and land of Irelond, of right, law, and custom appertaineth, and belongeth, afore eny issue of the said John of Gaunt, the fourth goten son of the said King Edward.  

n. 20.  The said title natheless notwithstanding, and without prejudice of the same, The said Richard Duc of York, tenderly desireing the weal, rest, and prosperity of this land, and to set apart all that, that might be trouble to the same; and considering the possession of the said King Herry the sixth, and that he hath for his time be named, taken, and reputed King of Englond, and of France, and Lord of Irelond, is content, agreeth, and consenteth, that he be had, reputed, and taken, King of Englond, and of France, with the royal estate, dignity, and pre-eminence belonging thereto, and Lord of Irelond, during his life natural; and for that time the said Duc, without hurt or prejudice of his said right and title, shall take, worship, and honour him for his Sovereign Lord.  

n. 22.  Item, It is accorded, appointed, and agreed, that the said Richard Duc of Y●●k rejoyse, be entitled, called, and reputed, from hens forth verrey and rightful heir to the Corones, royal estate, dignity, and Lordship aboveseid; and after the decease of the said King Herry, or when he wool lay from him the said Corones, estate, dignity, and Lordship, the said Duc, and his heirs, shall immediately succeed to the said Corones, royal estate, dignity, and Lordship.  
Item, 
n. 25.  For the more establishing the said accord; It is appointed, and consented, that the Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx, being in this present Parliament, shall make ●oothes to accept, take, worship, and repute the said Richard Due of York, and his said heirs, as above is rehearsed; and keep, observe, and strengthen, in as much as appertaineth unto them, all the things aboveseid, and resist to their power all them that will presume the contrary, according to their estates and degrees.  
The King understanding certainly the said title of the said Richard Duc of York just, lawful, true, and suffisant; 
n. 27.  by thavis and assent of the Lords Spirituelx and Temporelx, and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by authority of the same Parliament, declareth, approveth, and ratifieth, confirmeth, and accepteth the said title just, good, lawful, and true, and thereunto yeveth his assent, and agreement, of his f●●e will and liberty. And over that, by the said avis and authority, declareth, entitleth, calleth, stablisheth, affirmeth, and reputeth the said Richard Duc of York verrey, true, and rightful heir to the Corones, royal estate and dignity of the Reaumes of Englond, and of France, and of the Lordship of Irelond aforeseid; and that according to the worship and reverence that thereto belongeth, he be taken, accepted, and reputed, in worship and reverence, by all the States of the said Reaume of Englond, and of all his Subgetts thereof, saving and ordeigning by the same authority, the King to have the said Corones, Reaumes, royal, estate, dignity, and pre-eminence of the same, and the said Lordship of Irelond, during his life natural. And furthermore, by the same avis and authority, wool, consenteth, and agreeth, that after his decease, or when it shall please his Highness to ley from him the said Corones, estate, dignity, and Lordship, or thereof cesseth; The said Richard Duc of York, and his heirs, shall immediately succeed him in the said Corones, royal estate, dignity, and Lordship, and them then have and joy, any Act of Parliament, Statute, Ordinance, or other thing, to the contrary made, or interruption, or discontinuance of possession notwithstanding. And moreover, by the said avis and authority, stablisheth, granteth, co●fermeth, approveth, ratifieth, and accepteth the said accord, and all things therein contained; And thereunto freely and absolutely assenteth, and agreeth.  
From this Record it is evident,  
1. Richard Duke of York exhibited his bare Claim and Title to the Lords only.  
2. R●chard Duke of York did not petition the Lords. n. 11.  
3. His Council only delivered in a W●iting, containing his Descent, and Title by Birthright, and Hereditary Succ●ssion, and nothing else.  
4. The Matter was so high, the Lords could not answer it, nor enter into Communication thereof, without the King's Command, Agreement, and Assent.  
5. The King consented, and prayed and commanded the Lords to search and find out what might be opposed to the Duke's Claim and Title.  
6. They sent for the Judges, to advise what might be said against the Duke, to fortify the King's Right.  
7. The Judges excused themselves, for that the matter was so high, and touched the King's high Estate, and Regality, which was above the Law, and passed their Learning; wherefore they dare not enter into Communication thereof.  
8. The Lo●ds, upo● this Answer of the Judges, sent for the King's Sergeants and Attorney, and gave them the same Command, who made the same Excuse the Judges had done; but the Lords would not take it: Whereupon the Articles and Reasons against the Duke's Claim and Title were exhibited, n. 13.  
9 
The Author. p. 22, 23.  That in the Articles and Reasons against the Duke's Claim and Title, the●e is not the least word of Phileppe's being illegitimate, or that her F●ther was divorced from her Mo●her; nor is there the least mention that the House of Lancaster claimed by Prescription of sixty years' Possession, (which comes from Do●eman, and the Author is to find out both these things in the Parliament Rolls, or be guilty of downright Falsehood; for he reports them both as pleaded against the Duke's Title. As to the first, there needed no other Argument, if it had been insisted on, and could have been made good: And as to the second, neither was it insisted on, or mentioned, as was said before; and if it had, N●llum tempus occurrit Regi would have been a sure Rule in this Case: For it is absurd to think that Prescription, at least so sh●●t a Prescription as this, could justify a wrong, and make a Title in this Case; for there is another Rule of Law, Non confi●matur Tractu temporis, quod de jure non subsistit; no length of time makes that lawful which was not so from the beginning. If there be a right Heir of the Crown, that claims or else would claim, but that he wants either notice of his Right and Title, or Power to make it good, or forbears to claim for other sufficient Reasons, 
Vide n. 16.  here Prescription signifies nothing.  
10. It was allowed, at least not contradicted, that all Persons, and namely the Peers and Lords, might, and by the Laws or God and Man ought to help and assist him in Truth and Justice. n. 14.  
11. It was the Judgement of all the Lords, that the Title of the Duke, which was only Succession by Birthright, and Proximity of Blood, could not be defeated.  
12. That Richard Duke of York was by King Henry, and the Lords, acknowledged as very and rightful Heir to the C●own, and that he was so to be called.  
13. That the mean found out to save the King's Honour, and appease the Duke, if he would, was not, or could be imposed or forced upon him, but he was at liberty to accept or refuse it, and was no ways bound, but by his own consent n. 18.  
14 The Oath that Richard Duke of Y●rk took, was in pursuance of the Agreement; and any man may lawfully take an Oath to make good a Bargain, where no man receives Injury but himself; and so with his consent that is injured, any other Person concerned in the Agreement, may swear to the observation of it.  

Pag. 24.  Lastly, The Weal, Rest, and Prosperity of the Land (which the Author calls the Public Good) followed this Agreement; and the Reason was, that the C●own was restored to the right Heir; whereupon all Murmuring, Hatred; S●●●e, and Contention amongst the People, and Evil-will and Contrivances against one another ceased.  
These are all the Instances the Author useth; yet two are wanting, the Successions of Edward III. and Hen. IU. but seeing he may have perused an excellent Treatise, bearing the Title of the Grand Question, he may haply be convinced by what the learned Author hath said, 
Pag. 80, 81 83, 85, 86.  that they were both Usurpers; the first during his Father's Life, the second from the very time he took upon him Kingship.    

The Author's Words, p. 29, 30.  
There are three sorts of Persons may be said to have Possession of the Crown, an Usurper, a King de jure, and a King de facto; and because the Distinction betewen these doth not seem to be well understood, I shall briefly explain it.  
1. An Usurper is one that comes in by force, and continueth by force.  
2. A King de facto is one, who comes in by consent of the Nation, but not by virtue of an immediate hereditary right.  
3. A King de jure is one, who comes in by Lineal Descent as next Heir; and whose Right is owned, and recognised by the Estates of the Realm.  
The Author may make what verbal, frivolous Distinction he pleases between a King de facto and an Usurper, yet de facto they are the very same. Let him show an Example in this Nation, if he can, of a King de facto set up without an Army or Force; or of an Usurper that came in by Force, who did not make the Nation own him; and though he took upon him the Name and Title by force, and the assistance of a Party, yet afterwards made the States and People consent to it. Was not Edward II. made Prisoner by an Army, and afterward deposed; and Edward III. in his Father's life-time, set up by such as were under the power of that Army? And Henry iv set up by such as acted, and were under the power of that Force? Our Laws make no difference between an Usurper, and a King de facto according to the Author's description.  

The Author's Words, pag. 32.  
A King de facto, according to our Law, (as I said,) is one in quiet possession of the Crown, by Consent of Parliament, without hereditary Right; such as Henry IV. V VI VII. were all thought to be by those who made this Distinction. For, as far as I can find, the Distinction of a King de facto, and de jure, was then started, when the House of York so much insisted on their hereditary Right, and so many of our Kings had governed the Kingdom by Consent without it; therefore the Lawyers, to find a sufficient Salvo for the Kings of the House of Lancaster, framed this Distinction of Kings de facto, and de jure.   

Records, Law, and History.  

Rot. Parl. 1. Ed. IU. n. 8.  In the First of Edward IU. the Commons exhibit a Petition in Parliament, wherein they set forth his Title by Birthright, and Proximity of Blood; and say, Richard II. was lawfully, rightly, and justly seated and possessed of the Corone of Englond, Royal Power, Estate, Dignity, Pre-eminence, governance, and Lordship of Irelond, and the same joyed in rest and quiet, without interruption or molestation, 
Ibid. n. 9  unto the time that Henry late E●le of Derby, son of John of Gaunt, the fourth goten son of King Edward III. and younger brother of leonel, temerously, against rightwiseness, and justice, by force and arms, against his fe●th and ligeance, rered-werre at Flynt in W●les, against the said King Richard; him took, and imp●esoned in the Tower of London of  violence. And the sam● King Richard so being in prison, and lyvying, usurped and intruded upon the Royal Power, Estate, Dignity, Preeminence, possessions, and Lordships aforeseid; taking upon him usurpously the Corone and name of King and Lord of the same Reaume and Lordship; and not therewith satisfied or content, but more grevous thing attempting wykidly, of an unnatural, unmanly, and cruel Tyranny, the same King Richard, King anointed, coroned, and consecrate, and his Liege and most high Lord in the E●th, against God's Law, Manne's Ligeance, and O●ch of Fidelite, with uttermost punition attormenting, murdered with most vile, heinous, and lamentable death.  

Ibid. n. 10.  And that the same Henry unrightwisely, against Law, Conscience, and custom of the said Reaume of Englond, usurped upon the said Corone and Lordship. And that he, and also Henry, late called King Henry V his son●e, and the said Henry, late called King Henry VI the son of the said Henry, late called King Henry V occupied the said Reaume of Englond, and Lordship of Irelond, and exercised the governance thereof by unrightwise intrusion, and usurpation, and in noon otherwise.  
'Tis true, the Distinction of a King de facto, and de jure, was first heard of in this very Parliament, which declared the hereditary Right of the House of York, in in the First of Edward IU. cap. 1. in print; which agrees with the Record in the Parliament-Roll, n. 41. and not before; but not started then by the Lawyers, to fi●d a sufficient Salvo for the Kings of the House of Lancaster; but an Expression intended by Parliament (before they used it) to denote and make known an unlawful, pretended, or pretenced K●ng, that had not obtained the Crown by just Title; or to signify an Usurper, by way of Antithesis, or Contradistinction to a King de jure, or in Right. For this very Parliament, that had declared Henry IV. V VI Usurpers, calls them all, in this Act, or Statute, Kings de facto; or in Deed, and not in Right; and their Reigns, pretenced Reigns; and very often affirms them to be but pretenced Kings, such as did not reign lawfully, nor possess the Crown by just Title. And that this was the intention of the Parliament in the use of this Expression, the Statute itself will inform the Author, or any indifferent Reader that will peruse it.  
The Lawyers did not comment or descant upon these Words, or declare what power a King de facto had, before Easter-Term, in the Ninth of Edward IU. and then they acknowledge Henry VI King de facto in the Instance, to have been an Usurper, and that he was not King, forsque per usurpation, but by Usurpation. This Ninth of Edward iv was a troublesome Year, and Make-king Warwick, in all probability, with many others of the Nobility, were at this very time contriving against him, and to reinthrone King Henry; for in July following he was in ope● Rebellion against King Edward, and about the end of that Month, or beginning of August, mad● him Prisoner; who soon made his Escape, left the Nation, and went into Holland, &c and on the sixth of October, in that Year, Henry VI. was restored. The Earl of Warwick was popular, almost beyond Imagination; and probably the Lawyers, during the Contrivance, when th●y saw the People move that way, might start such Notions about the Power of a King de facto, as might encourage the Undertaking of W●●wick and his Friends, for Henry VI against Edward IU. 'Tis observable, that the Judges did not argue, or give any Opinion in this Case, but only the Sergeants and Apprentices of the Law, as appears in the C●se itself. 
Third Institut. fol. 7.  Sir Edward Coke hath outdone the Year-Book, 9 Ed. IU. Term. Pasch. concerning whole Opinion, the Author may read Mr. Pryn, 
Pag. 482, etc.  in his Plea for the Ho●se of Lords. This is a brief Account of a King de facto, and the Origin of the Expression; by which it is most manifest, that by the Parliament-Roll, the Statute and Case of the Ninth of Edward IU. he is no other than a pretenced, unlawful King, and an Usurper, though set up as the three Henry's were; and therefore the pretended Distinction is idle, as may also further appear by the following Statute; which, because not common, is here recited at large.  

Statutes at large, 17. Ed. IU. c. 7.  Item, Whereas in the most dolorous Absence of ou● Sovereign Lord the King out of this his Realm, being in the parties of Holland, and before his victorious Regress into the same Realm, 
Rot. Parl. 17. Ed. IU. n. 34 This Writ of Summons to the Parliament is dated, 15. Octobr. Rot. Cl. 49. Hen. VI M. 6. Dors.  in a pretenced Parliament unlawfully, and by usurped Power, summoned by the Rebel and Enemy to our Sovereign Lord the King, Henry VI late in Deed, and not of Right, King of England, holden in the Palace of Westminster, the 26th Day of November, in the Ninth Year of our Sovereign Lord the King that now is, under the coloured Title of the said Henry, the Forty ninth Year of the Incoation of his pretenced Reign, and the First Year of the Readeption of his usurped Power and Estate, divers and many Matters were treated, communed, wrought to the destruction and disherison of our Sovereign Lord the King, and his Blood Royal, by the Labour and Exhortation of Persons not fearing God, nor willing to be under the Rule of any earthly Prince, but inclined of sensual Appetite to have the whole Governance and Rule of this Realm under their Power and Domination: Which Communications, Treaties and Workings do remain in Writing, and some exemplified; whereby many Inconveniences may ensue to our said Sovereign Lord the King, and his Blood Royal, (which God defend,) and all Noblemen at this time attending about the King, and all his other Liege People and Subjects, unless due Remedy be provided in this behalf. Our said Sovereign Lord the King, by the Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and at the Request of the Commons in the said Parliament assembled, and by the Authority of the same, For the Surety of his noble Person, his noble Issue, and the inheritable Succession of the same; and for the Surety of all the Lords, noblemans, and other his Servants and Subjects, hath ordained and established, that the said pretenced Parliament with all the Continuances and Circumstances depending upon the same, be void, and of none effect; and that all Acts, Statutes, Ordinances, Treats, Communications, Conventions and Workings in the same pretenced Parliament treated, communed, accorded, wrought, had, or by Authority of the same Parliament enacted and ordained; and all Exemplifications made upon the same, or any part of them, and every of them, shall be reversed, canceled, void, undone, revoked, repealed, and of no force, nor effect.  
Henry VI. was a King de facto, according to the Author's Description, as well before, at, and after this Parliament, in the Ninth of Edward IU. and Forty ninth of Henry VI and is said to be in this Statute; yet in all these Times he is declared an Usurper, at this time a Rebel, and his Reign a pretenced Reign; and this Parliament is also declared a pretenced Parliament. 
Statutes at large, 1. H●n. VII. cap. 6.  Richard III was acknowledged to be a King, by a Parliament of his own calling, and was, according to the Author's description, a King de facto; yet in the First of Henry VII. he is declared an Usurper of the Realm, and not so much as allowed the name of King, or pretenced King, in that Statute.  
After the King de facto, and Usurper, Enquiry is to be made what Right and Title a King de jure may pretend to the Crown, according to the Constitution, Law, and Statutes of th● Kingdom; and it appears by the following plain Proofs, that it is on●y by Descent, and not otherwise. This is an hereditary, successive Monarchy; and immediately upon the Death o● Session of th' Predecessor, the Crown is vested in the lawful Successor by Inheritance and Proximity of Blood. Which appears,  
1. By the Record before cited of the Comprom●se and Agreement between R●chard Duke of You k and Henry VI in the Thi●ty ●inth Y●ar of his R●ign, wherein he makes his Cla●m only by lineal D●scent. He exhibited only a bare Title by Descent, and Proximity of B● odd, which could not be denied; and upon such showing of his Right, the L●rds concluded, it could not be defeated, 
Rot. Parl. 1. Edw. IU. n. 10. This was p● t of the Petition and Declaration of the Commons before mentioned, and p●ssed into an Act. n. 15.  notwithstanding what King Henry's Council could say against it.  
2. By the R●cord of the First of Edward iv Th● Commyns being in this present Parliament, having sufficient and evident knowledge of the said unrightw se Usurpation, and Intrusion, by the s●id Henry late Earl of Derby, upon the s ●● C●rone of Englond; knowing also certainly, without doubt or ambiguity, th● Right and Title of our said sovereign Lord thereunto true, and that by God's Law Manne's Law, and Law of Nature, he an● none other is and own to be their true, rightwise, and natural Liege and Sovereign Lord; and that he was in Right from the death of the said noble and famous P●i●ce his Fader, very just King of the said Reaume of England. And yet his Father was never possessed of the Crown.  
3. 
Ibid. n. 10.  And that the taking of Possession, and Entry into the Exercise of the Royal Estate, Dignity, Reign, and governance of the said Reaume of Englond, and Lordship of Irelond, of our said sovereign Liege Lord King Edward IU. the said 4th Day of March; 
That Day he took Possession of the Crown and Government. Ibid. n. 11.  and the Amotion of the said Henry, late called King Henry VI from the Exercise, Occupation, Usurpation, Intrusion, Reign, and G●vernaunce of the said Reaume and Lordship done by our said sovereign, and L egg Lord King Edward IU. the said 4th Day of March, was and is rightwise, lawful, and according to the Laws and Cuckoe ●umes of the said Reaume, and so own to be taken, holden, reputed, and accep ed. And over that, that our said Sovereign, and Liege Lord King E●ward iv the said 4 h Day of March, was lawfully sea●ed and possessed of the said Corone of Englond in his said Right and Title; and from thenceforth h●ve to him and his Heirs, K ngs of E●glond, all such Manners, castles, Lordships, Honoures, Londs, Tenements, Rents, Services, Fees, Fee-farm Rentes, Knights F●es, Avousons', Gifts of Offices, to year at his pleasure, Feires, Markets, Iss es, Fynes and Amerciaments, liberties, Franchises, Prerogatifs, E●chetes, Custumes, Reversions, Remey●ders, and all other Hereditamentes with her appurtenances, whatsoever they b●, in england, Wales, and Irelond, and in ●aleys, and the Marches thereof, as the said King Richard had in the Fe●● of S. Matthew the Apostle, (about three Weeks before he was deposed) the Twenty third Year of his Reign, in the Right and T●tle of the Corone of Englond, and Lordship of I●elond; and sh●ld, af●er his decease, have descended to the s●id Edmund Mortymer Earl of March, Son of the said Roger Mortymer Earl of March, as to the next Heir of Blood of the same King Richard, after his death, if the said Usurpation had not been committed; or after the said Edmund, to his next Heir of Blood, by the Law and custom of the said Reaume of Englond.  
4. The general Opinion of the N●tion in these Times, that the Right and Title to the Crown was by Inheritance only, and Proximity of Blood, caused Henry iv ●o claim it, 
Rot. Par●. 1. Hen. IU. n. 53. Rot. Parl. 1 R●c. III. in Exact Abridgement fol. 712 713, 714.  als descendit be right Line of the Bl●de, coming fro the good Lord Henry third.  
And for the same Reason, Richard III was by the three Estates, that is to say, the Lords Spi itual and Temporal, and Commons, in Parliament assembled, declared to be undoubted Heir of Richard Duke of York, Father to Edward iv very Inheriter of the Crown of England, and Dignity Royal, and, as in Right, King o● England by way of Inheritance. 
T● ssel's C●nt●n. fol. 231.  All this was insinuated by himself, in his Answer to Buckingham's Speech, when he took upon him Kingship. Likewise Henry VII. upon the same Account, prefers his Title by Conquest and Succession before that by Act of Parliament, which Pope Innocent VIII. 
In Cotton's Library, Cleopatra, E. 3.  in his Bull of Confirmation of his Title, says, belonged to him, non modo jure belli, ac notorio & indubitato proximo successionis titulo, verum etiam omnium Praelatorum, Procerum, Magnatum, Nobilium, totiusque ejusdem regni plebis Electione, & noch & decreto statuto, & ordinatione ipsius Angliae regni trium Statuum in ipsorum Conventu Parlamento nuncupato: 
Bacon's History of Henry VII. f. 1. & 3.  Not only by Right of War, (being saluted King by the Army in Bosworth-Field, and had there King Richard's ornamental Crown put on by Sir William Stanley.) and the notorious and indubitable next Title of Succession; but also by the Election of all the Prelates, and Great Men of the who e 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, in their Meeting called a Parliament. But that he thought himself most safe in the Pope's Confirmation is clear, for that in the Thirteenth Year of his Reign he procured the Bull to be renewed, and the Act of Parliament confirmed, by Pope Alexander VI 
Cotton, Lib. ut supra.  under pain of Excommunication and Curse to such as should, upon any pretence whatsoever, disturb the Peace of the Nation, and create Troubles against the Title of Henry VII.  
Henry VIII. in all his extravagant Acts concerning his Queens, and the Succession, founded them in pretended legal Proximity of Blood, according to the due course of Inheritance; the pretended want of which was the Ground and Suggestion still for passing those Acts. See 25 Hen. VIII. cap. 22. 28. Hen. VIII. cap. 7. And 35. Hen. VIII. cap. 1.  
5. 
Statut. 1. Mar. Sess. 2. cap. 4.  Where it hath pleased Almighty God, the 6th Day of July last passed, to call out of this transitory Life, unto his Mercy, our late Sovereign Lord King Edward VI by, and immediately after whose decease, the Imperial Crown of this Realm, with all Dignities, Dominion, Honour's, Pre-eminencies, Prerogatives, Stiles, Authorities, and Jurisdictions, to the same united, annexed, or belonging, did not only descend, remain and come unto our most dread Sovereign Lady the Queen's Majesty, but also the same was then immediately, and lawfully invested, deemed and adjudged in Her Highness' most Royal Person, by the due Course of Inheritance, and by the Laws and Statutes of this Realm.  
6. 
Stat. 1. Jac. cap. 1.  The Act of Recognition in the First of King James, doth not take notice of Henry VII. his Title, but of his Daughter Margaret's, as descended from Elizabeth her Mother, Daughter and Heir to Edward IU. and declare, that he was lineally, rightfully and lawfully descended or the Body of the most excellent Lady Margaret, eldest Daughter of the most renowned King Henry VII. and the high and noble Princess Queen Elizabeth his Wife, eldest Daughter of King Edward iv In consideration whereof, the Parliament doth acknowledge King James their on●y rightful Liege Lord and Sovereign; and further say, as being bound thereunto both by the Laws of God and Man, they do recognize and acknowledge, that immediately upon the Dissolution and Decease 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 b●●●erent Birthright, and lawful and undoubted Succession, des●●nd and come to His most Excellent Majesty, as being linea●ly, justly and ●lawfully next and sole Heir of the Blood Royal of this Realm; as it is aforesaid.  
In the First of the same King, there was a Conspiracy form against him, by Persons of divers Persuasions: 
Term. Mi●. 1. Jac. kept at Winchester.  Watson and Clerk, two Priests, pleaded it could not be Treason, because he was not crowned. All the Judges resolved, That King James being right Heir to the Crown by Descent, was immediately upon the death of Queen Elizabeth, actually possessed of the Crown, and lawful K●ng of E●gland, before any Proclamation, or Coronation of him, which were but Ceremonies. For their Treason they were condemned, and executed at Winchester, the 29th of November.  
These are impregnable Proofs from th● Constitution, Laws and Statutes of this Nation, what the Right and Title to the Crown is, and to whom the Succession is due.    
FINIS.