Selected quad for the lemma: justice_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
justice_n	earl_n	lord_n	son_n	2,567	5	5.7301	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86280	Certamen epistolare, or, The letter-combate. Managed by Peter Heylyn, D.D. with 1. Mr. Baxter of Kederminster. 2. Dr. Barnard of Grays-Inne. 3. Mr. Hickman of Mag. C. Oxon. And 4. J.H. of the city of Westminster Esq; With 5. An appendix to the same, in answer to some passages in Mr. Fullers late Appeal.	Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.; Bernard, Nicholas, d. 1661.; Hickman, Henry, d. 1692.; Harrington, James, 1611-1677.	1659 (1659)	Wing H1687; Thomason E1722_1; ESTC R202410	239,292	425

betwixt him and King Hen. the 6. nor in any one of his many Children though Edmund his third Sonne was made Earl of Rutland which Title had been formerly conferred on Edward Duke of York in his Fathers life time And though I give no credit to Ralph Brook whom I have found to be as full of Errors as our Author himself yet the Authority of Augustine Vincent shall prevail for the present and so let it go But then our Author might have found in the Animadversions that admitting Richard Duke of Yorke to be Earl of Cambridge he must have been the seventh not the eighth Earl of it as he saith he was and then that Errors lies before our Authors Doors as before it did And then again whereas our Authors tells us p. 2. fol. 49. that it is questionable whether his Father that is to say Richard of Conningburg Earl of Cambridge were Duke of York I must needs look upon it as a thing unquestionable and so must all men else which are skilled in Heraldry that Richard being executed at Southampton by King H●n the 5. before Edward Duke of York his elder Brother had been slain at the Battel of Agen-Court 25. But whereas our Author thinks it not onely difficult but impossible to defend a Title of the House of Lancaster to the Crown of England except I can challenge ●the priviledge of the Patriarch Jacob by crossing my hands to prefer the younger child in the succession before the Elder p. 2. fol. 43. admitting Richard the Second to resign the Crown or dying without children by course of nature For I behold Hen. of Bullingbrook Duke of Lancaster as Cousin German to that King and consequently his nearest Kinsman at that time wherein Edmund Mortimer Earl of March in whom remained the Rights of the House of Clarence was but Grandchild to the Lady Philip Daughter and sole Heir of Lionel Duke of Clarence and consequently more remote by two degrees from King Richard the Second then the other was By which proximity of blood as Edward the Third laid claim to the Crown of France and Philip the Second carried the Crown of Portugal and Robert Bruce the Crown of Scotland against the Balions so I am confident of some ability to prove that Henry of Bullingbrook Duke of Lancaster had a better Title to this Crown then the house of Mortimer For thoughby the common Law of England he may find it otherwise yet there are many things in the common Law which cannot extend to the succession of the Kings of England as in the case of Aliens which was that of King James or in the case of Parseners as in that of the two Daughters of King Hen. the 8. or in that of the half blood in the case of the sisters of King Edw. the 6. and finally in that of the tenure by curtesie in the case of King Philip the 2d of Spain admitting that Queen Mary had been Mother of a living Child And now I am fallen on these matters of Heraldy I will make bold to take in a Remembrance of the House of the Mountagues descended in the Principal branches of it from a Daughter of King Edw. the Third concerning which our Author tells us that I have made up such a heap of Errors as is not to be paralelled in any Author which pretends to the emendation of another p. 2. fol. 37. How so because forsooth I have made Sir Edward Mountague the Grand-child of the Lord chief Justice and the first Lord Mountague of Broughton not to have been the elder Brother of Henry Earl of Manchester and James Bishop of Winton but their Brothers Son But first this Error was corrected in a Postscript to the Examen Historicum before he could accuse me of it and consequently he doth but Actum agere and fit a Plaister for that sore which had before been cured by a better Chyrurgion Secondly This can be at the most but a single Error in case it had not been retracted and therefore no such heap of Errors as is not to he paralelled in any other And Thirdly It appears by another passage in this present Appeal p. 2. fol. 96. that he had seen the Postscript to the said Examen which rendereth him the more inexcusable by raising such an out-cry on no occasion In which passage he taxeth me with sallery in my third endeavour touching the late Barons of that House in making the said Sir Edward Mountague to be Lord Mountague of Broughton in Northamptonshire which acknowledged for one of his Mannors but not his Barronie For I knew well that Broughton and not Broughton gave the nomination to this branch of that Family having never heard before of any Estate they had in Broughton And therefore I must needs charge this Error which he so triumpheth at as one of the Errata's which were made at the Press though not observed when the sheets were read over to me and so not Printed with the rest Less candidly deals he with me in another place about the mistaking of a number that is to say 1555. for 1585. p. 1. fol. 41. The Errors being meerly pretal as is own phrase is And this he could not chuse but see though he can winck sometimes when it makes best for his meeting of that precedent once again on a more particular occasion then was given at the present where the time thereof is truly stated and where he spends some few lines in relation to it so that the motion was direct not Retrograde but that he had a mind to pull me a little back seeing how much I had got the start of him in the present race And as for the Error in the Errata I know not how it came but a friend of mine in reading over the first sheets as they came from the Press had put a Quere in the Margin whether Melkinus or Felkinus and that afterwards by the ignorance or incogitancy of my Amanuensis it might be put in amongst the rest of the Errata which is all that I am able to say as to that particular 26. Our Author had affirmed that St. Davids had been a Christian some hundred years whilst Canterbury was yet Pagan The contrary whereof being proved by the Animedvertor he flyes to Caerleon upon Vsk p. 2. fol. 29. by which instead of mending the matter he hath made it worse Mistaking wilfully the point in difference between us For if the Reader mark it well the question is not whether St. Davids or Canterbury were the Ancienter Archi-Espiscopal See or how many hundred years the one was elder then the other but for how long time Canterbury had continued Pagan when the other was Christian which he acknowledgeth to be no more then 140 years as was before observed by the Animadvertor And though Caerleon upon Vske had been an Archi-Episcopal See some hundreds of years before that honour was conferred on the City of Canterbury yet Canterbury might be be Christian as soon as