APPENDIX.

(SEE PAGE 256.)

The following note on the English succession has been kindly communicated to me by Miss Cooper, Authoress of "The History of America," and other works.

THE ENGLISH SUCCESSION.

THE right of succession to the English crown was one of the most disputed questions in our early history. So unsettled was this point, that after the death of the Black Prince it needed a special Act of Parliament to declare his only son, Richard, inheritor of his claim to the crown. From the time of William the Conqueror, indeed, there were always several persons who, as far as "right divine"-that is to say, right by direct descent-went, had greater claims than the actual wearer of the crown. But it is from the reign of Edward the Third that we may date those numerous factions that not only supported various pretenders in England, but asserted the legal rights of French, Spanish, and Portugese princes to the English throne. So late as the reign of James the First their arguments were so powerful as to deprive James of all feeling of security, and prompt him to imprison Arabella Stuart in the Tower for no other crime than that of marrying a descendant of the youngest sister of Henry the Eighth, possessing a claim to the crown by the will of the last named monarch.

Queen Elizabeth imprisoned for life Catherine Grey, for the same cause.1

Mary the First was jealous of Elizabeth's claim, and those of the house of Grey.

In 1562, the claims of Catherine Grey to the succession were urged by a lawyer named John Hales, whose pamphlet, filling the Queen with such a fury of suspicion, created what was called the “ Halesian Tempest."

Edward the Sixth died too young for controversy.

Henry the Eighth sent Margaret Douglas to the Tower lest she should "impedite the succession." 1

Henry the Seventh put the Earl of Warwick to death from jealousy of his more legitimate descent from John of Gaunt.

The Wars of the Roses sprang from the rival claims.

Henry the Fifth died too young to be troubled by this question. Henry the Fourth reigned by a disputed right.

Richard the Second was considered by many to have usurped the rights of his uncle, John of Gaunt.

The Sons of Edward the Third.

Two died in infancy, leaving

1. EDWARD THE BLACK PRINCE (died before his father). 2. LIONEL, DUKE OF CLARENCE (died before his father).

3. JOHN OF GAUNT, DUKE OF LANCASTER.

4. EDMUND, EARL OF CAMBRIDGE (made Duke of York by Richard the Second).

5. THOMAS, EARL OF BUCKINGHAM (made Duke of Gloucester by Richard the Second).

The Black Prince left one son, viz.: Richard the Second.

"On the death of the Black Prince there wanted not diverslearned and wise men in England that were of opinion that John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, eldest son then living of the said King Edward, should have succeeded his father, jure propinquitatis, before Richard, that was but nephew and one degree further off than he; but the old King was so extremely affectionate unto his eldest son, the Black Prince Edward, newly dead, that he would not hear of any to succeed him, but only Richard, the said Prince's son. Wherefore, he presently called a Parliament, which was the last that ever he held, and therein caused his said nephew Richard to be declared heir apparent."-PARSONS.

Though no obstacle was opposed to the King's will, yet the fact of the Black Prince exacting a promise from his father and brothers that his son should succeed to the crown in case of his own death before that of Edward the Third2 shows how uncertain was the question. Richard was well aware that many thought his uncle's title better than his own, and this was the chief cause of his hatred of the Lancaster family.

1 See Statutes of Henry the Eighth.

2 See Froissart.

Thus the great controversy was whether a younger son was not nearer to the King than a grandson. From the Conquest, hereditary succession had been as much disregarded as in the Saxon times. Thus Henry the First had been preferred to William, the son of his elder brother, and King John before his nephew Arthur. As Richard the Second had no children, the question of succession was again mooted. Again the pretensions of John of Gaunt were set aside, and the grandson of King Edward's second son declared heir presumptive.

The Second Son of Edward the Third was

Lionel, Duke of Clarence. He had one daughter, Philippa. This Philippa married Edward Mortimer, Earl of March. She had one son, Roger Mortimer, Earl of March.

Roger Mortimer declared heir by Richard the Second. From him descended the house of York, which, according to priority of birth, had the first claim.

But then came the arguments in favour of Lancaster: 1. The greater right of a son over a grandchild.

2. Henry of Lancaster traced his descent from Edward the Third entirely by the male line, while Roger Mortimer claimed his from his mother. And though the Salic law did not prevail in England, the Salic prejudice did, and furnished strong arguments and real supporters of the house of Lancaster. And the arguments in favour of Lancaster prevailed over those of York, otherwise Roger Mortimer would have been king at the downfall of Richard.

It is therefore worthy of remark, though well known, that if we appeal to the favorite reason of the English for any departure from established rule, viz. that of precedent, (for without a "precedent" we are almost afraid to move,) we shall find that the kings of England up to Charles the First furnished the strongest arguments against hereditary succession and "right divine." But it is from the reign of Edward the Third that this question takes its serious aspect, and it was owing to this controversy that not a king sat with confidence on his throne from the time of Edward the Third to James the First. The descendants of the three wives of John of Gaunt were a constant terror to the reigning family, and by their marriages with foreign princes became

the centres of plots and intrigues that filled our sovereigns with gnawing suspicions, prompting them to most of their worst deeds of injustice and cruelty.

John of Gaunt

Married, first, his cousin Blanche, daughter of Henry, Duke of Lancaster, and it was through her that he obtained his title of Lancaster.

NOTE. The titles of men by right of their wives, appear, at this time, to have been more readily admitted than titles inherited from their mothers.

Children of John of Gaunt by Blanche.

1. Philippa, married John the First of Portugal.

2. Elizabeth, married to John Holland, Duke of Exeter. 3. Henry Bolingbroke.

Children of Henry Bolingbroke. (Henry the Fourth.)

1. Henry the Fifth.

2. Thomas, Duke of Clarence.

3. John, Duke of Bedford.

4. Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester.

Only child of Henry the Fifth.

Henry the Sixth.

Only child of Henry the Sixth.

1. Prince Edward (in him the line of Henry the Fifth ends.) The other three sons of Henry Bolingbroke either died without children or they were slain in the civil wars.

So the representative of John of Gaunt was Philippa the eldest daughter, and it was from her that the house of Portugal claimed the crown of England.

But John of Gaunt married a second wife, viz. Constance, daughter and heiress of Peter the Cruel, and by her right he claimed for himself the crown of Castile.

Child of John of Gaunt and Constance.

Catherine, who married Henry, King of Castile.

1

From her descended the Infanta, daughter of Philip the Second1 of Spain, who claimed the crown of England.

John of Gaunt married a third wife, viz. Catherine Swinford.

Children of John of Gaunt and Catherine Swinford.

Three sons and one daughter. Of these, two sons died without leaving any children. There survived

John, Earl of Somerset.

Children of John, Earl of Somerset.

John, Duke of Somerset.

Edmund, the second Duke of Somerset.

Child of John, Duke of Somerset.

One daughter, viz. Margaret, married the Earl of Richmond and became mother of Henry the Seventh.

The children of Edmund, the second Duke of Somerset, being all slain in the civil war, Margaret was the sole representative of the male line of Lancaster.

But as the children of Catherine Swinford were born before marriage and only legitimatised by Act of Parliament, the House of Spain refused to acknowledge them.

The descendants of each of these wives had a strong party, and Henry the Seventh claimed the crown not by right of his wife, Elizabeth of York, but by his own right as heir of the house of Lancaster by the male line.

Philip the Second of Spain was descended by his mother from the first wife of John of Gaunt, and by his father from the second wife. Mary the First of England was the representative of the House of York. Their mar. riage was the legitimate union of the Houses of York and Lancaster, and a child of Philip and Mary would have had a greater claim to the English crown than any sovereign since Edward the Third.