He is no Man-slayer that slayeth a Man which is Excommunicate.

Dist. 63. Tibi Domino de sententia Excommu-. nicationis. Si judex.

Here may be added the most tyrannical and abominal Oaths which the Bishop of Rome exacts of the Emperors; in Cement, de jurejurando Romani dist. 6. 3, Tibi Domino.

De Consecra. Dist. 1. Sicut.

It is better not to Consecrate, than to Consecrate in a place not Hallowed. De Consecrat. Dist. 5. De his manus, ut jejuni

Confirmation, if it be ministered by any other than a Bishop, is of no value, nor is no Sacrament of the Church; also Confirmation is more to be had in reverence than Baptism; and no Man by Baptism can be a Christned Man without Confirmation.

L

XXIX.-The Articles acknowledged by Shaxton, the same do not preach, nor be not admitted

XXX.-A Letter written by Lethington the Secretary of Scotland, to Sir William Cecil, the Queen of England's Secretary, touching the Title of the Queen of Scots to the Crown of England: By which it appears that King Henry's Will was not signed by him.

[Ex. MS. D. G. Petyt.]

reasoning in my Lord of Leicester's Chamber, by the occasion of the Abridgment of Rastal, wherein I did shew you somewhat to this purpose; also these words, Infant and Ancestors be in Prædicamento ad aliquid, and so correlatives in such sort, as the meaning of the law was not to restrain the understanding of this word Infant, so strict as only to the Children of the King's Body, but to others inheritable in remainder; and if some Sophisters will needs cavil about the precise understanding of Infant, let them be answered with the scope of this word Ancestors in all Provisions, for Filii, Nepotes and Liberi, you may see there was no difference betwixt the first degree, and these that come after by

I CANNOT be ignorant that some do object as to her Majesties Forreign Birth, and hereby think to make her incapable of the Inheritance of England. To that you know for auswer what may be said by an English Patron of my Mistriss's Cause, although I being a Scot will not affirm the same, that there ariseth amongst you a Question, Whether the Realm of Scotland be forth of the the Civil Law. Liberorum appellatione, comHomage and Leageance of England? And therefore you have in sundry Proclamations preceding your Wars making, and in sundry Books at sundry times, laboured much to prove the Homage and Fealty of Scotland to England. Your stories also be not void of this intent. What the judgment of the Fathers of your Law is, and what commonly is thought in this Matter, you know better than I, and may have better intelligence than I, the Argument being fitter for your Assertion than mine.

Another Question there is also upon this Objection of Forreign Birth; that is to say, Whether Princes inheritable to the Crown, be in case of the Crown exempted or concluded as private Persons, being Strangers born forth of the Allegiance of England? You know in this case, as divers others, the State of the Crown: the Persons inheritable to the Crown at the time of their Capacity have divers differences and prerogatives from other Persons; many Laws made for other Persons take no hold in case of the Prince, and they have such Priviledges as other Persons enjoy not: As in cases of Attainders, and other Penal Laws: Examples, Hen. 7. who being a Subject, was attainted; and Edw. 4. and his Father Richard Plantagenet were both attainted; all which notwithstanding their Attainders had right to the Crown, and two of them attained the same. Amongst many Reasons to be shewed, both for the differences, and that Forreign Birth doth not take place in the case of the Crown, as in common Persons, the many experiences before the Conquest, and since, of your Kings, do plainly testify. 2. Of purpose I will name unto you Henry Ed. Maud the Empress Son, and Richard of Bourdeaux, the Black Prince's Son, the rather for that neither of the two was the King of England's Son, and so not Enfant du Roy, if the word be taken in this strict signification. And for the better proof, that it was always the common Law of your Realm, that in the case of the Crown, Forreign Birth was no Bar; you do remember the words of the Stat. 25 Edw. 3. where it is said, the Law was ever so: Whereupon if you can remember it, you and I fell out at a

prehenduntur non solum Filii verum etiam Nepotes, Pronepotes, Abnepotes, &c. If you examine the Reason why Forreign Birth is excluded, you may see that it was not so needful in Princes Cases, as in common Persons. Moreover, I know that England hath oftentimes married with Daughters, and married with the greatest Forreign Princes of Europe. And so I do also understand, that they all did repute the Children of them, and of the Daughters of England, inheritable in succession to that Crown, notwithstanding the Forreign Birth of their issue: And in this case I do appeal to all Chronicles, to their Contracts of Marriages, and to the opinion of all the Princes of Christendom. For though England be a noble and puissant Country, the respect of the Alliance only, and the Dowry, hath not moved the great Princes to match so often in marriage, but the possibility of the Crown in succession. I cannot be ignorant altogether in this Matter, consi dering that I serve my Sovereign in the room that you serve yours. The Contract of Marriage is extant betwixt the King, my Mistris's Grandfather, and Queen Margaret, Daughter to King Henry the 7th, by whose Person the Title is devolved on my Sovereign; what her Father's meaning was in bestowing of her, the World knoweth, by that which is contained in the Chronicles written by Polidorus Virgilius, before (as I think) either you or I was born; at least when it was little thought that this Matter should come in question. There is another Exception also laid against my Sovereign, which seems at the first to be of some weight, grounded upon some Statutes made in King Henry 8. time, (viz.) of the 28th, and 35th of his Reign, whereby full power and authority was given him the said King Henry, to give, dispose, appoint, assign, declare, and limit, by his Letters Patents under his Great Seal, or else by his last Will made in writing, and signed with his hand at his pleasure, from time to time thereafter the Imperial Crown of that Realm, &c. Which Imperial Crown is by some alledged and constantly affirmed to have been limited and disposed, by the last Will and Testament of the said King Henry

8. signed with his hand before his death, unto the Children of the Lady Francis; and Elenor, Daughter to Mary the French Queen, younger Daughter of Henry 7. and of Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk; so as it is thought the Queen my Soveraign, and all others, by course of Inheritance, be by these Circumstances excluded and foreclosed: So as it does well become all Subjects, such as I am, so my liking is to speak of Princes, of their Reigns and Proceedings modestly, and with respect; yet I cannot abstain to say, that the Chronicles and Histories of that Age, and your own printed Statutes being extant, do contaminate and disgrace greatly the Reign of that King at that time. But to come to our purpose, what equity and justice was that to disinherit a Race of Forreign Princes of their possibility, and maternal right, by a municipal Law or Statute made in that, which some would term abrupt time, and say, that that would rule the Roast, yea, and to exclude the right Heirs from their Title, without calling them to answer, or any for them well, it may be said, that the injury of the time, and the indirect dealing is not to be allowed; but since it is done it cannot be avoided, unless some Circumstances material do annihilate the said limitation and disposition of the Crown.

Now let us examine the manner and circumstances how King Hen. 8. was by Statute inabled to dispose the Crown. There is a form in two sorts prescribed him, which he may not transgress, that to say, either by bis Letters Patents, sealed with his Great Seal, or by his last Will, signed with his hand for in this extraordinary case he was held to an ordinary and precise form; which being not observed, the Letters Patents, or Will, cannot work the intent or effect sup. posed. And to disprove, that the Will was signed with his own hand; You know, that long before his death he never used his own signing with his own hand; and in the time of his Sickness, being divers times pressed to put his hand to the Will written, he refused to do it. And it seemed God would not suffer him to proceed in an Act so injurious and prejudicial to the right Heir of the Crown, being his Niece. Then his death approaching, some as well known to you as to me, caused William Clarke, sometimes Servant to Thomas Henncage, to sign the supposed Will with a stamp, (for otherwise signed it was never;) and yet notwithstanding some respecting more the satisfaction of their ambition, and others their private commodity, than just and upright dealing, procured divers honest Gentlemen, attending in divers several Rooms about the King's Person, to testifie with their hand-writings the Contents of the said pretended Will, surmised to be signed with the King's own hand. To prove this dissembled and forged signed Testament, I do refer you to such Trials as be yet left. First; The Attestation of the late Lord Paget,

published in th: Parliament in Queen Mary's time, for the restitution of the Duke of Norfolk. Next, I pray you, on my Sovereigns behalf, that the Depositions may be taken in this Matter of the Marquess of Winchester, Lord Treasurer of England, the Marquess of Northampton, the Earl of Pembroke, Sir William Petre then one of King Henry's Secretaries, Sir Henry Nevill, Sir Maurice Barkley, Doctor Buts, Edmond Harman Baker, John Osborn Groom of the Chamber, Sir Anthony Dennis, if he be living, Terris the Chirurgion, and such as have heard David Vincent and others speak in this case; and that their Attestations may be enrolled in the Chancery, and in the Arches, In perpetuum rei memoriam.

Thirdly, I do refer you to the Original Will surmised to be signed with the King's own hand, that thereby it may most clearly and evidently appear by some differences, how the same was not signed with the King's hand, but stamped as aforesaid. And albeit it is used both as an Argument and Calum niation against my Sovereign to some, that the said Original hath been embezzled in Queen Mary's time, I trust God will and hath reserved the same to be an Instrument to relieve the Truth, and to confound false Surmises, that thereby the Right may take place, notwithstanding the many Exemplifications, and Transcripts, which being sealed with the great Seal, do run abroad in England, and do carry away many Mens minds, as great presumptions of great verity and validity. But, Sir, you know in cases of less importance, that the whole Realm of England, Transcripts and Exemplifications be not of so great force in Law to serve for the recovery of any thing, either real or personal: And in as much as my Soveraign's Title in this case shall be little advanced, by taking exceptions to others pretended and crased Titles, considering her precedency, I will leave it to such as are to claim after the issue of Hen. the 7th, to lay in Bar the Poligamy of Charles Brandon, the Duke of Suffolk ; and also the vitiated and clandestine Contract, (if it may be so called) having no witness nor solemnization of Christian Matrimony, nor any lawful matching of the Earl of Hertford and the Lady Katharine. Lastly; The semblably compelling of Mr. Key, and the Lady Mary Sister to the Lady Katherine.

And now, Sir, I have to answer your desire said somewhat briefly to the Matter, which indeed is very little, where so much may be said; for to speak truly, the Cause speaketh for it self. have so long forborn to deal in this matter, that I have almost forgotten many things which may be said for Roboration of her Right, which I can shortly reduce to my Remembrance, being at Edinburgh where my Notes are: So that if you be not by this satisfied, upon knowledg from you of any other Objection, I hope to satisfy you unto all things may be said against her.

In the mean time I pray you so counsel the setled opinion against my Soveraign, to the Queen, your Soveraign, as some effectual advancement of my Lady Katherines Title. reparation may follow without delay, of the many and sundry traverses and dis-favorings committed against the Queen, my Sovereign: as the publishing of so many exemplifications of King Henry's supposed Will, the secret embracing of John Halles Books, the Books printed and not avowed the last Summer, one of the which my Mistris hath sent by Henry Killigrew to the Queen your Soveraign: The Disputes and Proceedings of Lincoln's-Inn, where the Case was ruled against the Queen my Soveraign; The Speeches of sundry in this last Session of Parliament, tending all to my Soveraigns derision, and nothing said to the contrary by any Man, but the Matter shut up with silence, most to her prejudice; and by so much the more as every Man is gone home setled and confirmed in his Error. And Lastly, The Queen, your Soveraign's resolution to defend now by Proclamations, all Books and Writings containing any discussion of Titles, when the whole Realm hath engendred by these fond proceedings, and other favoured practises, a

I might also speak of an other Book lately printed and set abroad in this last Session, containing many Untruths and weak Reasons, which Mr. Wailing desired might be answered before the Defence were made by Proclamation. I trust you will so hold hand to the Reformation of all these things, as the Queen, my Soveraign, may have effectual occasion to esteem you her Friend; which doing, you shall never offend the Queen your Mistris, your Country, nor Conscience, but be a favourer of the Truth against Errors, and yet deserve well of a Princess, who hath a good heart to recognize any good turn, when it is done her, and may hereafter have means to do you pleasure. For my particu lar, as I have always honoured you as my Father, so do I still remain of the same mind, as one, whom in all things not touching the State, you may direct, as your son Thomas Cecil, and with my hearty commendations to you, and my Lady, both, I take my leave. From Striveling, the 14th of January, 1566.

AN APPENDIX

CONCERNING

SOME OF THE ERRORS AND FALSEHOODS

IN

SANDERS'S BOOK

OF THE

ENGLISH SCHISM.

THOSE who intend to write romances, or plays, do commonly take their plot from some true piece of history; in which they fasten such characters to persons and things, and mix such circumstances and secret passages, with those public transactions and changes, that are in other histories; as may more artificially raise these passions and affections in their readers' minds, which they intend to move, than could possibly be done, if the whole story were a mere fiction and contrivance and though all men know those tender passages to flow only from the invention and fancy of the poet; yet by I know not what charm, the greatest part that read or hear their poems,are softened and sensibly touched. Some such design Sanders seems to have had in his book, which he very wisely kept up as long as he lived: he intended to represent the Reformation in the foulest shape that was possible, to defame Queen Elizabeth, to

stain her blood, and thereby to bring her title to the crown in question; and to magnify the authority of the See of Rome, and celebrate monastic orders, with all the praises and high characters he could devise and therefore, after he had writ several books on these subjects, without any considerable success, they being all rather filled with foul calumnies and detracting malice, than good arguments, or strong sense, he resolved to try his skill another way; so he intended to tell a doleful tale, which should raise a detestation of heresy, an ill opinion of the Queen, cast a stain on her blood, and disparage her title, and advance the honour of the Papacy. A tragedy was fitter for these ends, since it left the deepest impressions on the graver and better affections of the mind; the scene must be laid in England, and King Henry the Eighth and his three children, with the changes that were in their times, seemed to afford very