THE BOHEMIAN LAWES OR RIGHTS DEFENDED, Against the INFORMER: OR An Answer to an Information, falsly so called, secretly printed and divulged against the Writings published by the States of BOHEMIA.

Translated out of Latin by I. H.


The Translators Preface.

HOw hard a thing it is to translate from one language to another, and make the same word for word to answer one another, as face an­swereth face in a glasse; the right sense, phrase, grace, and proprietie thereof obserued, is not vnknowne to the learned, who haue acknowledged, and found by experience, this so great a difficultie. Much more hard (I say) then to compose a thing anew, and bring forth a mans owne free conceptions: which yet is both hard and painefull, as all new births be. Neither is it to be expected, or possible for any one, alwayes so exactly to expresse the very words & phrase, which in diuers languages are different: a libertie therein left to all Transla­tors, which here I challenge. Nor haue I varied much from the Authors words herein, but only in some few places (and that consulting with better iudgements then my owne:) which had I translated verbatim, might haue remayned very obscure. And so I referre it to the censure of all those who fauour the equitie of this so Christian a cause. Being an answere to an In­formation (or rather mis-information) of the Aduersaries both of Truth and Religion, who [Page] are now growne to that height of impudency, as they will Informe, affirme, yea and contra­dict and denie almost any thing, though as cleare as the Sunne, either in matter of right or fact, to maintayne their owne desperate cause. Witnesse all those idle rumors wee haue heard with our eares, from time to time dispersed amongst vs, and daily heare: which Time al­readie in part hath shewed to bee palpable and false, and (I hope) will doe more and more; comming from the father of lyes, and his mali­cious instruments: with such contumelious and vnworthy aspersions, vpon that most Noble and Heroicall Prince, now King of Bohemia, and his proceedings; whereby they endeuour by all meanes to disable, disgrace, and dispa­rage him, (and so haue done euen from the time of his Nuptials to this last Action, which hath set them all on fire) as (I hope) God in due time will make all the world eye witnesses and iud­ges thereof by the euent; Exitus acta probat: and hereupon wee will ioyne issue with them. If Rome be not Babylon, and Babylon fall not, then are we palpable lyers (as they call vs) like themselues, neither hath the Lord spoken by any of his Prophets: but if it bee, then let them bee lyers (as they are, and the children of their fa­ther the Deuill) and God only true, as it is writ­ten: in the meane time, desinant maledicere, I say no more. If there bee any escapes either in this translation, or the former impression of the [Page] Latin (whereof I was an ouer-seer) as also of the other Reasons and Relations, formerly published, (wherein was promised further sa­tisfaction, and iustification of the cause, since made good, both by the King of Bohemia him­selfe, and other his seruants and well-willers) I say as then: Me, me adsum qui feci; I hope the Christian Reader will pardon and passe ouer them. If those of the aduerse part, friends and well-willers to the Informer, perhaps meete and quarrell with such small matters, they shall but only bewray their distrust, and weaknesse of their owne cause, not finding greater matters to challenge, therefore carping at the least: re­membring that saying (whereof they make good vse) Calumniare audacter, semper aliquid haeret. And so I conclude with the Author in this his prooeme following, referring (as before) the further censure hereof to the discreete and iudicious Reader: let the wise iudge whether is more solid; and let the pru­dent Reader adhere and cleaue vn­to that which is the plainer, and grounded vpon best proofes.

The Bohemian Lawes or Rights defended, Against the Informer.

THAT most excellent cleere Lampe of right reason, is not so altogether ex­tinct by the fall of mans nature, but that some little sparke, (and so much) remayneth, that euen those who doe most of all offend against right reason, and confound, and ouerthrow both diuine and humane Lawes, doe yet couet, and would be thought to doe those vniust things they doe, (or indeauour to doe) by Law and by right. There bee some goe a fowling after King­domes, and hunt after Scepters: and send abroade their hounds, that they may assault the wild Beast ly­ing hid safe and secure in her owne Lords Parkes: pretending her now to belong to the iurisdiction of an­other, lest they should seeme iniurious to any. Such a hound we see a certaine Informer to bee: who, tooth and nayle, by right and wrong, would (if hee could) draw the Kingdome of Bohemia (in hope deuoured of his Lord) to the iurisdiction and rights of the same Lord of his: that hee might bee thought but only to seize vpon his owne prey, and not to driue another mans away. From the mouthing, and biting of this so great a Dogge, to deliuer this noble wild Beast, were a worke both iust and equall, well worth the la­bour: [Page] that she might be detayned vnder her owne law­full and friendly Keeper, in her owne proper Pastures: and not exposed to the ouergreedy iawes of others, to be deuoured, and swallowed vp. Our Informer knew very well, no right at all to the Kingdome of Bohe­mia, to belong to the most Illustrious Archduke Fer­dinand now Emperor. He saw the lawes and rights of the Bohemians (by them explicated in a short summe) among honest minded men, and all of the wi­ser sort, to bee held impregnable, not to bee shaken. What should hee then doe? Not to perswade the Wise: (for of that hee is out of hope) but to the intent hee might induce the base, and rude multitude into that opinion; that the writings of the Bohemians are sufficiently answered; and that the Lawes in them con­tayned are by him wholly shaken: he hath caused to be printed a certaine Treatise, here and there patched vp to that effect; that (at leastwise by the printed booke) The ignorant might perswade themselues the reasons of the Bohemians to bee sufficiently confuted. If the Informer would haue dealt with the prudent only, and experienced in affaires, and in the lawes of gouernement, there was no cause why he should publish those vaine commentaries, secretly and by stealth im­printed. For hee had aduersaries very ready, who were able to discouer vnto him sufficiently, the false­hoods, arts, deceits, and wilinesse of those commen­taries: and lay open the matter before the wise with­out disguising and fallacies; yet did hee promise to himselfe the victorie, if hee first could communicate those things (which were only debated among the wi­ser [Page] sort) in print to the ignorant multitude. There was no cause truely (I confesse) wherefore by this in­formation of the aduerse part, the reasons of the Bo­hemians more largely explicated, and in vaine op­pugned, should haue beene committed to the multitude in print; bua that the other Informer, hath euen in forced good men; fauouring the equitie of the cause hereunto! who surely (lest he should seeme both to him­selfe and others ouer wise) haue thought this Information very fit to be published. Let the wise iudge whether is more solid: and let the prudent Reader adhere, and cleaue vnto that which is the plainer, and groun­ded vpon best proofes.

THE ANSWERE To the Information against the A­pologies and Writings of the States of Bohemia.
The first Part.

THE pretended Information therefore saith,Fol. 1. The Kingdome of Bohemia is not Electiue but in case, &c. And a little after,Fol. 2. Nei­ther is it true that it hath continued the ELECTIONS free from six Ages. First of all,The scope of this first Part. therefore we must establish the Right of ELECTION belonging to the Bohemi­ans, which the Informer goeth about to ouerthrow: then after must examine the proofes produced to the contra­rie; from the selfe-same Historians which the Informer, for the defence of his owne cause doth alledge. For the Kingdome of Bohemia, with the Prouinces incorporate, (any one void of passion being iudge) it is most certain, that from the very first beginning, it hath beene altoge­ther free, and neuer subiect to any Hereditarie Succes­sion; and hath preserued this Libertie entire, and hither­to inuiolable: not at all verball onely, of no force, vertue and effect; as the Informer falsly informeth. The words of the Informer are these: [Page 2] That in the Bohemian tongue euery assumption, or recei­uing of a King,Fol. 5. Not euery re­ceiuing of a King, signified by the word Election. indifferently, whether it bee done by right of Succession, or by true ELECTION; is signified by the word ELECTION, largely and ge­nerally taken, though improperly.’

Is not this tergiuersation more then ridiculous? For the Bohemian tongue is not so barren, but that it is able to distinguish ELECTION from Inheritance: yes those words of ELECTION, and Inheritance, in the Bohe­mian Language to bee most different, the Bohemian Hi­storians (as also others who haue written in the Ger­mane and Latine Tongues: to wit, Dubrauius, Aencas Syluius, and others; and the Priuiledges also of diuers Emperours) doe teach and declare.

Therefore for the confirmation,The most free Election of the Bohemians proued. and strengthening of the said free ELECTION of the Bohemians; it is to be noted, the same (together with the most free States and Bohemian Nation) from none, either Emperour, King, Monarch, or Prince to haue taken her first beginning.

For Czechius (after whose name euen to this day,Haiac. Fol. 20. Aeu. Syl. c. 34. Dub. lib. 1. the Bohemian Nation in their owne Proper speech is so cal­led) was the first, who with his Legions inhabited that Kingdome, before desert; adorned with no Lawes, or Policie: who being dead; when, for the want of a Prince, diuers Controuersies, Iarres, and Discontents heere and there did arise: it was decreed by common counsell, and with one consent, for the ELECTING of some one, to whom as to their Prince, they might performe obedi­ence. Instantly hereupon Crocus, a man excelling all o­thers in fame, and highly beloued of all, was ELEC­TED: And so in the yeare of Christ, 670. the first foun­dation of the Right of ELECTION was laid.Anno 670. By this forme of most free, and lawfull ELECTION, and [Page 3] by no other Law, or Right whatsoeuer, all the succeeding Princes, called Dukes of Bohemia, from the said yeare 670. vnto the yeare 1109. and so for the space of 579. yeares fully complete; without any manner of Impedi­ment of any, either Prince or Lord; haue beene aduan­ced to that Gouernment. And chiefly the circumstances of Historians in these cases are well to be weighed. For scarce (or not at all indeed) any succession of a new Prince is at any time described, where there is not mention made of the conuocations, (at leastwise) of the Nobles of the Kingdome, and of the consultations for the ELE­CTING of a new Prince. And there can bee no exam­ple found,See here what kind of Succession in the Kingdome of Bohemia. Haiec. Fol, 3. although the Son succeeded the Father, where euer the said ELECTION hath beene omitted: and oft­times, the children of the dead Prince neglected, his bre­thren or others, also many times the younger before the elder, haue beene preferred and ELECTED. Yea, the children and descendents of Czechius, the first founder of this state, not regarded, they haue ELECTED Crocus wholly of another Family: as Haiecius testifieth. For during that most great Confusion and Anarchie, the wiser sort, and haters of euill, called the whole people of both Sexes to the Sepulchre of Czechius; proposed the ELE­CTION of a new Prince, and with the generall consent of all, ELECTED the afore-said Crocus. And the rea­sons of this ELECTION are also set downe by other Historians. For Cosma Pragensis saith thus: ‘This man was in deliberation of iudgements discreet, to whom, as well out of the proper Tribes, as out of the Comminaltie of the whole Prouince, euen as Bees vn­to the Hiue, all men did flocke, for the deciding of controuersies.’

And George Bartholdus testifieth: [Page 4] Crocus a iust man, [...]. Barth in Boh. [...]ia, pag.11 and of great esteeme and authoritie at that time among the Bohemians, was Elected Prince.’

Fiue Moneths after the death of Crocus, Fol. 8. Anno 710. which hap­pened in the yeare 710. the States of the Kingdome, and the Prelates againe assemble, for the ELECTING of a new Lord; and doe establish in the Gouernment Li­bussa: whereof growing verie wearie, (as being foemi­nine) shee speaketh on this maner to the States: Depart ye, Fol. 11. and that day I appoint you returne to me againe: whom­soeuer then you shall ELECT for your Prince, hee shall bee my Husband. Anno 722. And by this meanes Premislaus, Anno 722. obtayned both the Principalitie, and Libussa. Where Cos­ma Pragensis introduceth the people speaking thus to Premissaus: ‘Our Lady Libussa, Pag. 6. and all the whole people doe command that thou come quickly, &c. Thee our Duke, thee our Iudge, thee our Gouernour, thee our Protector, thee onely doe we ELECT for our Lord.’

Premislaus diseased and growne old, calleth the States together: as Haiecius testifieth, Anno 745. gaue them great thankes that they had ELECTED him; and did en­treat for Nezamislius that hee might bee ELECTED: who also, by this meanes, of the Nobles was ELECTED and aduanced to the Gouernment of the Kingdome.

After his death,Fol. 36. the Barons, Nobles, and Peeres, with the whole people, Anno 783. assemble together be­fore the gates of the Castle of Prage, and with one con­sent doe ELECT, and salute Mnatha the sonne of Ne­zamislaus for their Prince.

Duke Mnatha, Anno 804,Fol. 41. leauing his Sonne Vogenus [Page 5] desperately sicke, dieth.If the free right of electi­on did not be­long to the States of Bu­hemia, by what right could they haue chosen this Rohonicus? The States lest also his sonne should est-soones pay his debt to nature, and so (by rea­son of the ambition of the Nobles) fearing sedition might arise, each one of these great ones aspiring to the Duke­dome) they constitute another, Rohonicus by name. But this man ruling with verie great rigour, they assemble a­gaine, ELECT Vogenus, and leade him to the Dukes seat, to wit, the castle of Vicegrade. But Rohonicus, who at that time was in the said castle, pretending a former E­LECTION, doth defend himselfe with verie great force. At length, breaking open the gates, by flight hee seeketh his safetie, and Vogenus is confirmed in the Throne.

After the death of VOGENVS,Fol. 50. If the State of Bohemia were hereditarie, without all doubt the elder bro­ther had been retained. the whole people wel nere of all Bohemia, Anno 822. doe assemble together at the Castle of Vicegrade: where there arose great contro­uersie, whether of the two sonnes of VOGENVS (when some for the goodly stature of his bodie, wished rather the yonger, others the elder) ought to be chosen, CRE­VOMISLIVS at length, after diuers concertations, is ELECTED: and both the brothers, to wit, CREVO­MISLIVS and VRATISLAVS, were contented to a­bide the decrees of the Nobles and States. And this so­lemne act of the confirmation of CREVOMISLIVS, in so great an assemblie of people (in their owne Lan­guage, applauding, Viuat, viuat, CREVOMISLIVS, this is our Duke, and will preserue vs in all honour and pro­speritie) commeth well to be noted.

CREVOMISLIVS dying, Anno 852. the States assembled againe,Fol. 56. saluted, and ELECTED NECLA with verie great acclamations: who departing this life, all the people come together at the fountaine of Gesen­lia, and there ELECTED HOSTIVITIVS the sonne of NECLA, Anno 873.

[Page 6] The Historie in this place maketh mention of a sort of Nobles of Bohemia, Fol. 65. called LOPOTES: these were Lieu­tenancs of Prouinces, who did prescribe Lawes both to the people and Peeres of the Kingdome; yea, euen to the Dukes themselues, and saith, they did also partici­pate of the gouernement of the Kingdome.

The ELECTION also of BORIVORIVS,Fol. 71. the son of HOSTIVITIVS (which fell out in the yeare 890. Heathenish Sacrifice being vsed) as also of the Duchesse, who afterwards by the said LOPOTES, was ioyned in marriage with BORIVORIVS) is with diuers circum­stances described by the Historian.

BORIVORIVS, who first receiued the Sacrament of Baptisme,Fol. 72. willing to bring in Christianitie, (expulsed out of his Kingdome) in his place STVGMIR of Baua­ria was ELECTED, Anno 895. Whom notwithstan­ding, seeing he was ignorant of the Bohemian tongue, af­ter two moneths, sufficiently rewarded, they sent home a­gaine. Whereupon (a Prince now wanting) againe great tumults did arise: Wherefore a generall assembly was called at Vicegrade, for the ELECTING of a new Duke; and there pro and con, both for and against BO­RIVORIVS, great clamour, disputed by armes; at length (the Boriuorians Victors) it was concluded for BORIVORIVS.

The yeare following 897.Fol. 74. in the month of March, the States do againe assemble, and there with one con­sent an Embassage decreed for the recalling of Boriuo­rius out of Morauia. This man, after (with the consent and approbation of the States) resigned the Dukedome to his sonne Spitigneus: who a little while after dying, thereafter Anno 907. the aforesaid Lopotes doe assemble: where, after diuers and long treaties, Boriuorius againe is [Page 7] called; who when as now he had giuen himselfe to a pri­uate and quiet life, giuing thankes to the States for their so propense loue towards him, he doth intreat them for his sonne Vratislaus to be ELECTED.

Notwithstanding the States,Fol. 78. although they had con­ceiued some doubt by reason of his sonnes tender age, yet animated with the fathers counsailes, at length they ELECTED him, and aduanced him into the seate of the Dukedome.

Vratislaus dying, Anno 916.Fol. 83. after diuers publique as­semblies, Wenceslaus his sonne, being now of riper yeares, in the presence of the States doth speake vnto his mo­ther (a Widow, and hitherto euilly administring the Dukedome) on this manner: Know (mother) that the Lo­potes, Lords and Nobles of this State, haue ELECTED mee for their Duke; wherefore rest thou thy selfe contented with the right of thy widowhood, leaue the charge of reigning and ruling to mee. And thus was Wenceslaus with the con­sent and applause of the States and people, declared Duke of Bohemia.

This Wenceslaus, famous for his pietie and Sanctimo­nie,Fol. 101. being slaine by his brother Boleslaus a tyrant; into his place, Anno 967. Boleslaus the second (as the Histo­rian testifieth) was ELECTED.

Anno 1003. the States againe assembled,Fol. 126. and ELE­CTED Iaromyrius the sonne of Boleslaus: his father (and that against the counsell of the States) departing into Polonia, and desiring, that if any disaster should befall him (as indeed afterwards he was depriued of his sight) they would ELECT his sonne into his roome.

Vdalricus, Fol, 41. persecuting his brother Iaromyrius, Breti­slaus, [Page 8] Anno 1037. was ELECTED. But the ELECTION of Spitigneus the sonne of Bretislaus (which happened in the yeare 1055.) by reason of the multitude of the dead mans children, was verie solemne: for the States in verie great number assembled, and (the testament of the Duke deceassed wel weighed) all of what condition, state, or age soeuer they were, ELECTED the elder sonne of Bretislaus, Spitigneus by name.

After him,Fol. 163. his brother Vratislaus, who (according to our Author) first obtained the title of King from Henrie the Emperour,) by common suffrage of all is ELEC­TED.

To him, Conradus his brother, by the free voyces and ELECTION of the States was substitute: who although he left behind him two sonnes, yet (those reiected) they did ELECT his cousin Bretislaus, and after that Anno 1100, Borsiuogius.

After this, those that were descended from the Dukes and Kings stirred vp great tumults; wherefore, Suato­plucus the Duke Anno 1109. being slaine in battaile, the Emperour at that time present, spake thus to the Bohe­mians: My Lords, I call God to witnesse, I take the death of this Prince heauily; but seeing it was his will, it is your parts now, which soeuer of his sonnes suruining, you had rather, to ELECT into the Place of his Father. But the States at that time present, desired Otho, the brother of him that was dead, the Emperour approuing thereof: vnto whom notwithstanding, after, the rest of the States opposed themselues with all their might; whereof hereafter more at large.

Thus farre Haiecius, the most famous Writer of the Bohemian affaires, alledged also by the Author of the in­formation [Page 9] himselfe: out of whose Copie printed at Prague in the Germane Tongue, Anno 1596. with the priuiledge of Rodulph the Second, of godly memorie, Emperour, all these things were faithfully transcribed, and tra [...]slated. Where also the Germane words, Electi­on, or Right of Electing, doe differ from the words of Re­ceiuing or Hereditarie succession, as farre as heauen from earth. For another thing is Erivahlen, to ELECT, Aneg­men, to receiue, and Ererben, to take by Hereditarie right. Which words also in the reuersals of the Emperours, Ro­dulph and Mathias, de Anno 1608. (as hereafter more at large shall be demonstrated) are read expresly distinct. And for the greater demonstration of the vaine glosse of the Informer, let vs heare the Authors who hitherto haue written the affaires of Bohemia in the Latine tongue. Dubrauius making mention of Nezamislius, the sonne of Primislaus, expresly saith thus: ‘Though he were dull, and void of vnderstanding, yet for the memorie of his father, he obtayned the fauour of the States, and of them in the solemne accustomed manner, was saluted Prince in the castle of Visserade, Vicinus taking it hainously, who thought himselfe rather wor­thie the same dignitie of a Prince.’ And after, Hostivitius (his younger brother taking it grieuously) was put by the States in his fathers place.Lib. 3. pag. 20. Item, ‘In that assembly Vratislaus is declared Prince by all the States.Lib. 8. p. 59. These phrases also are often found elsewhere. Aeneas Syluius vseth phrases without any ambiguities: ‘Him doe they make choyce of for their Prince.’

Hee through the fauour of the people gouerned. And although this Author handleth our matter somewhat succinctly; yet, confronting him with the things before [Page 10] going, it may easily be vnderstood. Hereunto agreeth the testimonie of Cosma Pragensis: these be his words: ‘After the [...] of Brecislaus, all the Bohemian Nati­on,Chron. p. 30. Anno 1055. both great and mall, by common counsell, and a like affection and will doe ELECT for their Duke, his first borne sonne, Zpingnen: singing, KYRIE E­LEYSON.’ Item The Bohemians all fauouring Vladislaus, he is exal­ted t [...] the Throne. And againe, The Bohemians all assenting, Vladislaus is aduanced to the Throne.

These and many other testimonies are found among the Historians, which if they should all be put here, the day would sooner saile than they: for, from the verie first beginnings, euen vntill the yeare 1109. they haue re­mained in a continued course without interruption. In which yeare, Suat [...]plucus being slaine, when as the Em­perour, at that time present (as afore we haue touched) at the instance of certaine noble men of Bohemia, remai­ning in the campe, desired that Otho, the brother of Sua­toplucus, might be ELECTED, and published: the Au­thor expressely saith thus: ‘In the generall assembly, the chiefe Lords found themselues agrteued at the ELECTION made in the campe, contrarie to the institution aud decrees of their Ance­sters:’

To wit, whose ground works (as the Fundamentals of a most free and lawfull election) were laid, Anno 670. ‘And the ancient manner, &c.’ That is to say, their old obserued customes, euen to that verie day inuiolably maintained.Lib. 11. pag. 53. Wherefore also the States (as Dubrauius and other Historians testifie) would not ratifie, nor admit for good the ELECTION for­merly made: but to preserue their ancient right, reiecting [Page 11] Otho, with the generall consent of the whole people, they elected for their Duke, Vladislaus: notwithstanding that Borsiuogius was the elder brother. These are the words of Vladislaus in the Author: ‘That it was no priuate thing which Borsiuogius desired, but belonged to the suffrage of the whole people. And therefore not from one brother alone; but from all the States the gouernment to be sought and sued for, be­cause that in fine is like to be firme and stable, which by common counsell shall be decreed.’

Vladislaus dying, the States doe elect Sobislaus his yonger brother: not onely three of the dead mans chil­dren put backe, but againe also his elder brother, the a­foresaid Otho, not caring, though as then hee had the castle of Prague in his hands and keeping.

Otho would not yeeld vnto him the castle of Visserade, before he first perceiued that by the generall assembly, he was declared Prince, with so great and generall con­sent of the States, that he despaired of keeping the castle any longer: which after hee had quit, hee returned in anxitie into Morauia, and in threatning wise, as though in short time hee would reuenge this iniurie in that the Bohemians had preferred before him (who was the el­der) his younger brother Sobislaus.

Here a man may easily see, that to the States of the kingdome wholly belonged the pure and free ELECTI­ON of creating and chusing their King. Afterwards, in the yeare 1135, in the time of Sobislaus, in the generall assembly of the States (the Prince and the States con­senting together) diuers decrees concerning the ELEC­TION were ordained, and among other things:

1. The forme of the gouernement, in time of vacancie,Haiec. fol. 233. what it ought to be.

2. How and in what manner the States ought to be called vnto the ELECTION.

[Page 12] 3. The Parliament assembled about the ELECTION, not to continue aboue three daies.

4. That the Prince ELECTED, presently after his en­trie, ought to confirme by Oath that he will make good, and preserue the priuiledges of the Barons, Nobles, and Comminaltie.

Afterwards,Hitherto the institutions of Ancesters, and the old customes con­cerning the Election of the Du [...]es were obserued. Frederick the Emperour, Anno 1159. (as before is said of Henrie, and Vladisl [...]us declared King of Bohemia) created Vladislaus King, but not as yet the roy­all name vsed, vntill Philip the Emperour, Anno 1200, gaue the golden Crowne to Primislaus Otthocarus, and so renewed the royall dignitie. Hence so many letters, so many priuiledges, so many reuersals, and the explications thereof following thereupon. For from the verie first E­LECTION euen to that time, without the benefit or fa­uour of any Emperour, by no confirmation regall, or any other law written, but onely by custome, they haue exer­cised their free ELECTION. But afterwards (the re­gall dignitie with the dependences thereof comming in place) expresse Authentickes were necessarily required. Nor yet, that the said Emperors did offer any manner of preiudice to the liberties and priuiledges of the Bohemi­ans, but rather ratifie, and more perfectly confirme them, the Letters of Philip the Emperour doe witnesse.

Haiec. fol. 286. There [...] con­firmed: the kingdome of Bohemia no­thing at all to belong to the Emperour, but in re [...]pect of the regall dig­nitie.
to wit, for euer it should be lawfull for them (Zuewi­gen zeyten) by vertue of their ancient customes, to E­lect whomsoeuer they would for their King.

The same in a certaine priuiledge of Frederick 2. Em­perour, is confirmed in the words following: ‘Wee doe constitute and confirme him King: and this so sa­cred, and worthy a constitution we approue, and the king­d [...]me of Bohemia freely, and without all exaction of money (according to the accustomed iustice of our Court) we grant to him, and his success [...]rs for euer. Willing that whosoeuer by them shall be Elected for Kings, come vnto vs, or our successors, in due manner to aske the Regall dignitie.’

[Page 13] Hence it appeareth manifestly, the Emperour to haue reserued to himselfe and the Empire only, the recogniti­on of the Regall dignitie, as proceeding from him and the Empire: but the right of free ELECTION to haue left altogether vntouched. For the Bohemian Kings and Princes themselues, did neuer interprete these things any otherwise. For when as Anno 1216. Wenceslaus Sonne to King Primislaus (his Father yet liuing) was ELECTED: hereupon such letters of the Emperors approbation were erected: ‘Our faithfull and well-beloued Henrie Marquesse of Morauia, and the whole State of the Lords, and No­bles of Bohemia, haue declared to our Highnesse, that by common consent, and assent of our well beloued Ot­tocarus King of Bohemia they haue ELECTED for their King Wenceslaus, the first borne sonne of the Kingdome of Bohemia.

Behold here a testimonie more then authenticke of a most free ELECTION, where (to wit) the sonnes of the Kings themselues, could no other way bee aduanced to the Crowne of Bohemia, but by the free and lawful ELE­CTION of the States preceding: which also by euery approued Writer of the Bohemian affaires may bee pro­ued. And although seldome they ouer-passed them who were sprung of the bloud Royall; yet sometime also it hapned: Examples, King Rodulph, Albertus Duke of Bauaria, Georgius Podibradius, and others.

Nor more doth the continued Succession of bloud of the former Kings serue to the pretended Inheritance,Fauour not to be drawne as a consequent, nor good deeds to be rewarded with euill. than that of the Polonians, which (by reason of the E­LECTION of the Sonne of a precedent King) hath bin alwayes the same. Insomuch as euen to their present King (though otherwise aOf Sweden. Suecian) the fauour of the [Page 16] Mothers Line originally deriued from the Posteritie of Iagellus, sometime Prince of Pole, was much auaileable to him for the obtayning of that Crowne of Polonia. Meane while, yet this Kingdome, without any contradi­ction to be plainly and most freely ELECTIVE, no man euer denyed. For seeing that these two Kingdomes haue (almost) both the selfe-same foundation, (to wit from Czechius and Lechus brethren) and time, and people: yea and Language but a very little differing (as all Histo­ries witnesse,) what should hinder, but that they euen from the first beginning, in this point of Politike Go­uernment, haue resembled each other? But besides this of Poland,Both the Son and Nephew, and Nephewes Son and Ne­phewes Ne­phew (the Fa­ther dead) are elected. What Succession hence of He­reditary right in a Kingdome Electiue▪ The vpper Pa­latinate of Ba­ua [...]ia. we may produce also other examples, euen of the Sacred Romane Empire, where the Heires in bloud haue succeeded one to another▪ albeit they could haue no iust claime, or hope grounded vpon Hereditarie Succes­sion. Surely the Ancesters of the Bohemians neuer suf­fered the most free right of ELECTION to be wrested out of their hands: in so much as they opposed them­selues with all their might to Iohn the sonne of Henrie the seuenth Emperour, Anno, 1311. elected King. For that he had a purpose to exchange Bohemia with the Pa­latiate: this being repugnant to their free ELECTI­ON, which granteth to no King (without the consent of the States) any power either of treatie, transaction, or disposall, or testament, or translation any other way what­soeuer made, that may bee hurtfull to their Priuiledges. The Letters giuen to the King by the States at that time solemnely assembled at Cubit, (commonly called Elbo­ga) doe declare this sufficiently, the tenour whereof is such: ‘We are ignorant (Sir) for what desert on our parts your Maiestie should goe about to ouerthrow our free, and most ancient Rights of ELECTION. It cannot be hid from your Maiesty, that neither of force nor arms, [Page 17] but only of our propense loue towards you, you haue bin ELECTED King. Wherefore not without iust cause, wee maruell, that by any pretensed exchange, your Maiestie would seeme to subiect vs to Lodwick of Bauaria, and s [...] spoyle vs of our most free Priui­ledge of ELECTION. Surely Lodwick shall neuer by any meanes (except by force of Armes, or our free ELECTION) beare rule ouer vs.’

This resolution of the Bohemians seene, King Iohn both procured the cassation of the Treatie,Haiec. Fol. 388. and also made a reconciliation with the States of Bohemia.

This also testifieth Dubrauius in these words: ‘There in a verie great Assembly of the Bohemians,Pag. 193. Lod­wick by his owne testimonie, doth purge the King of that so grieuous a suspicion they had of him, and sheweth vnto them in writing the Paction or Agree­ment alreadie begunne with the King: wherein it was expresly and plainly added; the same to remaine rati­fied and firme, If it were confirmed by the com­mon assent of the Bohemians.

By this short deduction a man may easily see; the States alwayes to haue preserued the Right of ELEC­TION; and that from the first Originall of the Bohemi­an Nation, not to haue acquired or sought the same from any, either Emperour, or King. But Charles the fourth, when to him as Emperour, the aforesaid Priuiledges of Fredericke the second, concerning the receiuing of the Regall Dignitie, were to bee confirmed: mooued no doubt with the loue hee carryed to his Posteritie, and in hope to confirme the Hereditary Succession, limited thus (but of his owne head) the free ELECTION of the Bohemians.

[Page 16] In case onely and euent, where none Male or Female shall remayne aliue, legitimate, (which God forbid) des­cended of the Linage, Progenie, Seed, or Royall Of­spring of Bohemia.

But to Charles it belonged not to insert a new clause to the Confirmation, and by this meanes to ouerthrow the States free Election, no more then to his Father Iohn, to exchange Bohemia with the Palatinate. Also no Con­firmation doth adde any new thing. Neither doth it be­long to any King to ouerthrow the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome: especially seeing they proceeded not from the precedent Kings, but had their beginning euen with the Nation it selfe. Wherefore also the said clause (the which for default or want of power and [...] by it selfe is nothing) was neuer obserued by the States. Also Charles in another Priuiledge both of the same day and yeare with the former, approouing in the words following, the free ELECTION of Wences­laus, the eldest Sonne of Primislaus Ottocarus, is most e­uidently contrarie to himselfe. The words be these: ‘And the Letters of the sacred King of the Romanes, Frederick, wherein is expressed that the illustrious Henrie Marquesse of Morauia, and the whole body of the Lords, and Nobles of Bohemia, by the assent, and will, of the Illustrious Ottocar, sometime King of Bohemia, our most deare great Grand-Father, haue chosen for their King the Illustrious Wenceslaus, his eldest Son: & the same ELECTION by the afore-said Frederick King of the Romanes was approued.’

And againe, seuen whole yeares after the afore-allea­ged Confirmation, to wit, Anno 1355. the same Charles doth alleage the ELECTION of the said Wenceslaus in these words: [Page 17] Who is knowne to haue held the same Marquisate, with all the Honours, Dominions, and appurtenances there­of, by no other meanes, than as by this example our selfe hold from the Illustrious Iohn of famous memo­rie sometime King of Bohemia, our most deare Fa­ther. As also that may be a verie probable Argument, out of the Letters of the sacred King of the Romanes, Frederick, wherein is expressed, that the Illustrious Henrie, then Marquesse of Morauia, and the whole body of the Peeres, and Nobles of Bohemia, with the assent of the Illustrious Ottocar, our great Grand-father, elected for their King his Illustrious first-borne Sonne Wenceslaus, and the same ELECTI­ON by the afore-said Frederick was confirmed.’

If therefore Charles himselfe doe both acknowledge and approoue the ELECTION of the Sonne of the King yet liuing; by what right doth he endeuour of his owne braine, to bring in that often mentioned restraint, which doth altogether oppugne this free ELECTION? And how otherwhere can hee deny to the States power of E­lecting, the Royall Issue yet remayning? Doe not all these things sauour of manifest Contrarieties? Moreo­uer the words of Charles the fourth, well considered, it will appeare he speaketh of the Males, or Females surui­uing of the Royall Bloud only of Bohemia. What can this therefore profit Ferdinand, borne of the Arch-dukes Bloud of Austria? Neither is that instance of Ferdinand, (so farre fetched from his great Grand-mothers Mother) any thing materiall, which were it of any force, that Roy­all Bloud would extend it selfe in infinitum: and so a free power of Electing, should neuer be granted to the Bohe­mians. Which yet Charles the fourth expresly set downe; and others also might be found both nearer, and worthy to bee preferred before Ferdinand. Hence therefore it is [Page 18] euident, that the intention of Charles the fourth, can by no meanes bee extended beyond his owne Children; as also the disposall of Vladislaus which also the clause of Charles the fourth, (which eight yeares after hee put in the Golden Bull Imperiall) doth approue. These are the words of the Bull: ‘Sauing yet alwayes the Priuiledges, Rights, and Cu­stomes, of our Kingdomes of Bohemia, as touching the ELECTION of a King in case of vacancie, by the inhabitants of that Kingdome, who haue right of Electing a King of Bohemia, doing according to the contents of their Priuiledges, and long obserued Cu­stome from the sacred Romane Emperours, or Kings obtayned: the which by this Imperiall Decree, wee minde in nothing to preiudice: Yea, wee doe order the same now and euer hereafter, in all the tenour and forme thereof, shall be of most vndoubted strength and validitie.’

Seeing therefore Charles the fourth, here-hence in the now cited Bull Imperiall, doth so strictly in case of va­cancie of the Kingdome, prescribe the maner of Electing according to the Priuiledges and long obserued Custome of the Bohemians: And that there the Customes and Priui­ledges of the Bohemians, haue nothing at all which may make for the aforesaid clause of confirmation. Yea, in as much as Wenceslaus (his Father Ottocarus yet liuing) by no other Right but of ELECTION attayned to the Kingdome▪ and this ELECTION approoued, and con­firmed by Charles the fourth himselfe: It followeth ne­cessarily that now Charles the fourth hath debarred him­selfe from the right of that clause, and that in no wise it can bee extended further than the Issue descended of his Family, now at this day extinct. And if others of the Fe­male Line descending from Charles the fourth, should be [Page 19] substitute; assuredly both Kings, and Electours, and Dukes, (whereof hereafter more at large) from thence also drawing their Pedigree, would be found much nea­rer to the Crowne. Adde hereunto that by the new con­stitution of Charles the fourth, de Anno 1356. the Sons of the Kings could by no meanes reigne without ELEC­TION going before. The States also afterwards obser­ued this very strictly, and chiefly, Anno 1438. For so saith Dubrauius: Albertus made haste into Bohemia, that by his owne presence hee might approoue, and confirme the ELE­CTION there of him made, against all those who not only dissented from it; but had made choice of an­other for their King (a verie Child) to wit, Casimire, brother to the King of Polonia.

And Curaeus a Writer of Silesia, (one of the incorpo­rate Prouinces of Bohemia) hath these expresse words: Sigismund the Emperour dying without Heire Male, before his death was a chiefe Authour, and meanes to the Nobles of both Kingdomes (to wit, Hungarie, and Bohemia) that they would ELECT Albertus Prince of Austria, with whom Elizabeth, the Daughter of Sigismund was ioyned in Marriage. The counsaile of Sigismund was yeelded vnto, and the Gouernment conferred vpon Albertus.

If the Kingdome had beene Hereditarie, and to haue fallen by right of Succession to the Daughter of Sigis­mund, the Wife of Albertus, what needed the Authoritie of Sigismund or his Counsell? After the death of this Albertus, notwithstanding hee had a Sonne borne after his death, they ELECTED Albertus Duke of Bauaria, [Page 20] without any respect at all had, either of Bloud or Linage. These are the words of Syluius.

The Bohemians (after the death of Albertus was knowne) assembling at Prage,
Cap. 57.
make one bodie of the whole Kingdome, and appoint a day for the ELECTING of a new King. Those who hated Albertus, deny his Sonne to bee King. This sentence preuayled. There­fore Albertus Duke of Bauaria, by the greater part of the voyces of the Lords is declared King.

And here is very remarkeable the reason of Duke Al­berts refusing of the Kingdome:Albertus of Ba­uaria, why hee refused the Kingdome. which (as Dubrauius testifieth) was not in respect either of Bloud, or not of competent Election: but of the difference onely of Reli­gion, and of discord. For so expresly writeth DVERA­VIVS: Albertus Prince of Bauaria, contrarie to all mens opi­nions, excused himselfe for not accepting of the King­dome of Bohemia: Answering that hee had rather dye then reigne in that manner as the Bohemians desired; for they desired that hee would not onely allow and ap­prooue the Communion in both kindes, but also protect the same with all his estate and power, against all Ad­uersaries whatsoeuer.’

Haiecius also doth by all meanes confirme this excuse of Albertuss, Fol. 138. saying he was otherwise much enclined to receiue the Crowne, and that he went to the Confines of Bohemia, as farre as Chamus; that hee entertained the Bohemian Ambassadours sent thither, in the Bohemian Tongue, and gaue them thankes for so great Honor con­ferred vpon him: Neither to haue regarded the Reasons of the Emperour Frederick, (pretending I know not what right for his Nephew,) but onely to haue alleaged [Page 21] the Dispute of Religion. Which done the Regall Dig­nitie was offered to Frederick; who although hee did produce for excuse the rights of his Nephew Vladislaus, yet there were other, and that more pregnant reasons of his refusall of the Kingdome, which Haiecius doth de­duce in Anno 1441. Two yeeres after,Fol. 139. Fol. 141. the States againe send their Ambassadors to Frederick, and because he re­fused the Kingdome, they desire out of hand to know whether he would permit and grant it to Ladislaus: Ad­ding that otherwise they would proceed to another Ele­ction. Frederick therefore doth attempt all meanes for his Nephew, who being elected, and afterwards dead, the Right of ELECTION, Anno 1458. was againe confirmed much more: For so Dubrauius.

In Bohemia there was neuer more ambitions & hot pur­suite in Parliament for electing a King: so many,
Lib. 30. Haiec. Fol. 167.
& so great Competitors there were, which kindled it.

Where (among seuen or eight, among whom the Em­peror himselfe,If this King­dome had bin Hereditarie by force of that clause of Char­les the fourth: What hope had there bin for so many great Perso­nages? Lib. 30. p. 344. The King of France, by what consanguinity I pray you was he ioyned to the precedent Kings of Bohe­mia? Kings also & Princes were Competitors) the States to shew their most Free Right of ELECTI­ON, with one consent (all the former reiected) elected for their King Georgius Podiebradius, &c. Here the words of Dubrauius come well to be noted: ‘If the French Ambassadours might haue beene admitted and heard in Parliament, the opinion was; that they would haue carryed it away by voyces.’

Where is here (although the aforesaid Sutors omitted not to alleage what pretended right euery one of them had) where (I say) is that so often repeated clause of Char­les the fourth, or restraint, or limitation? Had not the free power of ELECTING a King, taken deep root in the hearts of the Bohemians? Yea for the greater de­monstration of this Libertie, (the Sonnes of Podiebradius that was dead, neglected, wherof hereafter more at large) a new and solemne Parliament is celebrated, for the E­LECTING of a King: hereupon Dubrauius: [Page 22] It was a solemne custome that the Parliament for crea­ting a King should be celebrated at Prague, Lib. 35. Maiec. Fol. 18 [...]. but it see­med good among so many diuers affections and dispositi­ons at that time of all the States, and hauing Prague in great iealousie, and suspition, to translate the Parlia­ment to the Hils of Cuttemberg, publike assurance and safe conduct being giuen to all men to come thi­ther, and returne freely, and with great libertie to end the giuing of their voyces. Rosensis and others, &c. giuing their voyces with great content, helped Mat­thias, but the maior part desired for their King Vla­dislaus, the Sonne of the King of Polonia, a young man, and by reason of his age not infected with any partiall Factions: the greater number preuailed.’

In this Election there can no Historian bee alleaged, who saith, that there was mention made of Bloud and Linage. For if the Royall Stocke and Linage had giuen any occasion to ELECTION, well might the Sonnes of William of Saxon, comming of the elder Sister of King Ladislaus, Haiec. Fol. 213. haue beene preferred before Casimire, Sonne to the King of Poland, of the younger. And al­though afterwards the afore named Vladislaus King of Bohemia, agreed with the States for the electing and crowning of his Sonne, yet after his death, when his Sonne sent his Ambassadors, (with the Ambassadors of the Emperour and King of Poland) to the States, the first time they suffered a great repulse; at length after a whole yeare very great controuersies (by reason of the Oath and other circumstances) arising, and first extinguished, with very great difficultie he is elected. These are the words of Dubrauius.

The States doe promise the free Gouernment to Lod­wick, vpon this condition, that so soone as hee should come into Bohemia, he should confirme the Lawes and [Page 23] Liberties of all the States with his owne mouth by Oath, as is accustomed to the Kings of Bohemia.

Lodwick being dead,Fol. 267. the ELECTION againe was held with very great Solemnitie: where although Fer­dinand alleaged his double right, as well in respect of his Wife, Anne the Daughter of Lodwick that was dead, as also in respect of the Pactions of the Family; yet the States (none of all these things regarded) did make haste to the solemne ELECTION. And ordayned out of e­uery of the three Prouinces eight ELECTORS for the choosing of a King: yet taking first a solemne Oath to elect the most worthy. It is true indeed that Ferdinand, Ferdinand, by no Hereditary Right but only by the free E­lection of the States is crow­ned. was elected but for other causes; wherefore also thence­forth, he renounced those Rights before pretended and by his Ambassadors moued, by expresse reuersalls: the te­nour whereof is this: ‘We Ferdinand, by the grace of God King of Bohemia, Infant of Spaine, Archduke of Austria, Marquesse of Morauia, Duke of Luxemburgh, Silesia▪ and Mar­quesse of Lusatia, &c. Doe make knowne to all men by the tenour of these presents, how that the Barons, No­bles, and also Cities, and the whole Comminaltie of the Kingdome of Bohemia, of their free and meere good will, according to the Liberties of that Kingdome, haue ELECTED vs for the King of Bohemia: where­fore wee acknowledge that wee haue vnderstood this thing from their Ambassadours, and know (indeed) and find, that the fore-said States and Comminaltie of that Kingdome, not of any right, but so as before is written (choosing vs for King of Bohemia) of their free and meere good will haue made that ELECTION. Witnesse these our Letters confirmed with our Seale an­nexed: Giuen in the Citie of Vienna the 13. of Decem­ber, 1526.’

[Page 24] For the answer of these reuersalls, that they (to wit, Anno 1545. and 1547. in the Parliament) were changed, the States with the Prouinces incorporate, doe alledge Ignorance altogether: and they of the house of Austria, seeing they affirme it, let them also looke vnto it, how they will proue it: yea, if further inquirie should bee made into this Parliament, it would easily be euicted, their proceeding to haue been verie preiudiciall and dan­gerous to the liberties and priuiledges of the Bohemians. And so the Bohemians shall be destitute of no defence ei­ther of exception of default of authoritie, or of constraint by violence, or feare, or of other things that may make for them.

After that, in the yeare 1549, Maximilian, at the in­stance of his father Ferdinand, in the same manner alto­gether, as the sonne of Prim [...]slaus, was ELECTED King: and after his fathers death, Anno 1562, was crowned.

The same happened, Anno 1575, with Rodolph the sonne of Maximilian.

How Matthias, Anno 1608, came vnto the Crowne, there is no man ignorant: for the reuersall Letters, aswel of Rodolph, as of Matthias, doe plainely shew, that he at­tained to the Crowne of Bohemia neither by transaction, or disposall, or priuiledge, or treatie, or by the clause of Charles the Fourth, or any other Right: but onely by the free and lawfull ELECTION of the States. The re­uersalls of Rodulph, among other things, are in this man­ner: ‘We haue required the States of Bohemia The reuersall Letters of Ro­dulph the Se­cond, Empe­rour and King of Bohemia. that if we should happen to die without heires Males, they would accept for their future King, the Archduke Matthias, our el­dest Brother: after that hee hath lawfully sought it of [Page 25] them, according to their priuiledges, and that after our death, they would ELECT and crowne no other but him; stedfastly hoping that the States, both for the aforesaid weightie reasons, and the generall good of the Kingdome, will condescend to this our friendly petition. We on the other side, for vs, our heires, and all our suc­cessors of the kingdome of Bohemia, do promise, that this acceptation (and after our death, ELECTION, and coronation of our welbeloued Brother) shall no way bee fraudulent, or preiudiciall, neither to their receiued pri­uiledges, statutes, donations, customes, &c. especially from the time of Ottocarus, Iohn, Emperors; Charles, Wenceslaus, Sigismund, Albert, Ladislaus, George, Lodwicke, Ferdinand, and Maximilian, our most deare Father. In witnesse, &c.’

The words of the reuersall Letters of Matthias are these: ‘We haue often desired our Lord and Brother the Empe­rour Rodolph, that during his life time he would desire the States, for the acceptation of vs, (wee notwithstan­ding first lawfully demanding the same) as the eldest bro­ther of his Maiestie, so as his Maiestie dying without lawfull heires Males, they would not ELECT for their King, and crowne any other besides vs. To whom assem­bled (a large proposition being made from his Maiestie,The reuersals of Matthias the Emperour, King of Bohe­mia, and Pre­decessor of Ferdinand that now is. and our Embassadours present) we haue there promised, that if the petition of his Maiestie bee yeelded vnto, this shall nothing at all der [...]gate from their liberties, priui­ledges, and ancient obserued customes. Which done, the States with a free and ioynt consent, vpon his Maiesties proposition and our petition, haue declared vs for the time to come, and after the deceasse of his Maiestie with­out heires Males, (as the eldest brother of his Maie­stie) to be elected and crowned King, &c.’ [Page 26] And this declaration of the States, wee doe promise shall not derogate, or any way be hurtfull to their priuiledges, nor ought to be, &c.’

By that which hitherto hath beene said, it may easily appeare, the Kingdome of Bohemia to be altogether E­LECTIVE, and not at all hereditarie; yea, and that the right of ELECTION can neuer by any treatie, disposal, paction, or any other way be infringed, or limited. For the right of ELECTION (as hath beene often remem­bred) tooke her beginning, not from any Prince, but from the most ancient foundation of the Kingdome, euen to this day inuiolate, and vntouched, in a continued course and order without any interruption at all. And although against the aforesaid acts, lawes, and priui­ledges, some things might be obiected, yet the reuersals of Rodolph and Matthias now alreadie produced, doe proue an vndoubted right of ELECTION. And if the pretended right of Succession were or euer had beene so manifest, what needed so many words and reuersals? Al­so it is to be noted, that the said treaties of the two bro­thers, Rodolph and Matthias, (which they begun by a mutuall consent with the States) are of more force than all other declarations, and precedent disposals: not one­ly in respect of time, but also in respect of forme and mat­ter. For there expresly the common consent of all the States is alledged, which no otherwhere, neither in the priuiledge of Charles the Fourth, or the disposall of Vla­dislaus or in any other writing is to be seene; nor yet the said priuiledge or disposall of any Emperour, one or o­ther, found to be confirmed: which surely doth put vpon this whole matter no small suspition. And by good right Charles the Fourth, Vladislaus, and Ferdinand, (seeing they alwaies spake in fauour of themselues and their posteri­tie) are reported to haue beene but bad witnesses in their [Page 27] owne cause; neither were their letters confirmed by the succeeding Emperour. But if they had bin approued by the common consent of the States, they might in some sort haue beene borne withall: but seeing the Kings are both actors and witnesses, verie well in this case may their testimonie be reiected.

By all these things may any one (not ouer-taken with passion) easily see, that the States in all ages euen to this day, by force of their proper libertie, haue strongly main­tained, and preserued, the free and absolute power of E­LECTING Kings: so that none whosoeuer is able law­fully to pretend any right at all to the Crowne of Bohe­mia, but onely by the lawfull and free ELECTION of the States, ELECTED. And also he that shall attempt any thing against the free ELECTION of the States, ip­so facto doth disable himselfe of the Crowne.

Now let vs see the Arguments of the con­trarie INFORMATION.

First of all, hee citeth priuiledges, and in the Margen,The friuolous and feeble grounds of the Informer an­swered. Fol. 1. the Golden Bull Imperiall of Charles the Fourth. But the Author of the Information seemeth to haue put the same of purpose out of the List of the other fundamen­tall reasons: for by the former alledged words of the said Bull, it is manifest that the same doth rather make against him than for him, no mention at all beeing made of the Royall issue, either Male or Female.

Therefore the first fundamentall reason in order is,Fol. 1. the confirmation of Charles the Fourth, of the said priuiledge of Fredericke the Second. Hereunto euen now and alrea­die is answered, and to any one looking well into this in­formation it may easily appeare.

[Page 28] First, That the same is called the Golden Bohemian Bull, in title onely.

Secondly, That it is no other thing then the confirma­tion of the priuiledge of Fredericke the Second.

Thirdly, Further, that nothing else was demaun­ded from the Deputies of the States at that time, whose Names are prefixed in the said writing.

Fourthly, The words of the said writing doe testifie the same.

Fifltly, Therefore, that the clause of the successi­on of the royall issue, annexed by Charles the Fourth, to the aduantage of himselfe and his children, was inser­ted to the great preiudice of the libertie of the Bohe­mians.

Sixtly, Neither did the Bohemians euer allow the same. Also in later times (although there were many Emperors of the house of Austria) there appeareth yet no ratification of any Emperour: all which doe argue the manifest inualiditie of the said clause, and the imper­fection of their pretence or claime. There is yet in the said confirmation this clause: ‘In case or euent, where the Male or Female not suruiuing,This clause is subiect to a thousand ex­positions and ambiguities. or by any other way shall happen to be vacant.’

By the force of this confirmation, and clause in other places alledged against the Bohemians, it seemeth easie to proue that these things make for the States, and that the vacancie of the Kingdome doth not simply and meerely consist in the default of heires Males or Female, but also in other defaults. But howsoeuer this be, daily practise (as is aforesaid) is altogether contrarie to the strict re­straint of this confirmation. And although the often re­peated clause of the said Bull, together with the conse­quence of the Austrians drawn from thence, were of some moment; yet it is manifest that the Ofspring descending [Page 29] from the house of Luxemburg by the elder sister Anne, the wife of William Duke of Saxon, the eldest daughter of the Emperour Albert, of the house of Austria, should ra­ther come nearer the Crowne of Bohemia, then those of the house of Austria at this day liuing. For the Austri­ans doe descend from the younger sister, to wit, Eliza­beth, the second daughter of Albertus the Emperour, and wife of Casimire, King of Polonia, the great grandfather of Anne wife to Ferdinand of Austria, the brother of Charles the Fift, Emperour. Now on the other side, let vs see the ofspring of the said William Duke of Saxon. Surely among them of the house of Brandenburgh, of Denmark, of Mekelburgh, and others, are found so many, that euen the most renowned Queene of Bohemia, Elizabeth, the daughter of Great Brittaine, may deriue from thence her pedegree. Wherefore this argument, th [...] of the Au­strians, without all exception the greatest (as they would haue it) may easily be ouerthrowne.

  • [Page 30]Charles the Fourth, Emperour, King of Bohemia, the Author of the often repeated clause.
  • Sigismund.
  • Elizabeth, the wife of Albert of the house of Austria, Em­perour, and King of Bohemia.
    • Anne, the eldest daugh­ter of Albert, wife of Wil­liam Duke of Saxon.
    • Margaret, the wife of Iohn, Elector of Branden­burgh.
    • Anne, the wife of Fre­derick the First, King of Denmarke.
    • Christianus the Third, King of Denmarke.
    • Fredericke the Second, King of Denmarke.
    • Anne, the wife of Iames, King of Great Britaine.
      • Charles Prince of Wales.
      • Elizabeth Queene of Bohemia.
    • Elizabeth, the yonger daughter of Albert, the wife of Casimir, King of Polonia.
      • Vladislaus,
      • Elizabeth, after her name changed and called Anne, the wife of Ferdinand, of the house of Austria.
        • Maximilian Empe.
        • Rodulph. Matthias.
        • Charles.
        • Ferdinand now Emp.
      • Sophia, the wife of Frede­rick Marquesse of Bran­denburg.
      • Marie, the wife of Frede­rick Simm [...]rensis: Elector Palatine.
      • Lodwick the Fourth, E­lector Palatine.
      • Frederick the Fourth, E­lector Palatine.
      • Frederick the Fift, King of Bohemia, &c. Elector Palatine, &c.

The clause hath thus: the Male or Female of the royall Linaege. But the most renowned King and Queene of Bohe­mia, Frederick and Eli­zabeth, are (as you see) of the royall linage. Ergo.

[Page 31] The second Argument of the Informer is,Fol. 1. The disposall of Vladislaus. the disposall of Vladislaus; but this is both of lesse force than that, and in some sort doth seeme to make for the States: where (to wit) he doth affirme King Lodwick of the meere free [...] will of the States of Bohemia, to haue been receiued King, which free will (surely) ouerthrowing Succession, doth againe seeme to stablish ELECTION. And it was the true intent and meaning of this disposall, onely to assure the States of the Education and Marriage of the Children of Vladislaus. Now whatsoeuer is there said con­cerning the Succession of Anne the Kings Daughter, that is only spoken incidentally and by way of narrati­on, not to prooue any thing at all. Neither was it in the Kings power in this case, by expresse Law to dispose; and although the said disposall were of some weight, yet it is to be vnderstood not of all in infinitum, descending from the said Anne, but onely of her selfe, and so the same for Ferdinand appeareth to be of no efficacie.

As for the third Argument of the Informer, to wit,Fol. 1. The Reuersals of Ferdinand changed. the Reuersals of Ferdinand, euen now and before is answe­red, so as it is to be iudged of no moment. For Ferdinand himselfe, Anno 1526. (not as then ignorant of his owne pretences, nor needing to be informed thereof, nineteene yeares after to haue vnderstood of them,) doth clearely confesse, and declare sufficiently both by his Ambassa­dours at that time sent, and Letters reuersals: that there­by hee doth renounce all those his pretences. Surely that those Reuersals, either after the space of nineteene yeares, or for other aduerse accidents, Anno 1545. and in the yeares following (whereof more in their due time and place) should suffer shipwracke and miscarrie, there is no reason that can indure to heare of it. And in whatsoe­uer manner and sense the Reuersals of the yeare 1545. be taken, yet they doe alwayes make mention of the fore­passed ELECTION saying, [Page 32] Of their owne free and meere good will they haue elected and receiued vs for their King and Lord, which for­wardnesse of the States, and ELECTION and receiuing of our Person for King, wee will both prose­cute and recompence with all clemencie.’

And this is that which the States of right desire, Fer­dinand the first also himselfe approued; but to Ferdinand the second, of whom now the question is, this is altoge­ther displeasing. Wherefore the States doe so often com­plaine of the said Ferdinand the second, both that he of­fered violence to their Priuiledges and Liberties: as also that the alleaged Confirmations, and Reuersals, (sometimes approuing Hereditarie Succession, sometimes ELECTION of free and meere good will, with pro­mise of gratuitie) are altogether contradictorie; and so the Kingdomes Hereditarie, (as the Austrians contend to make Bohemia) to haue nothing common with the E­lectiue, rend [...]ing of thankes and other promises there­vpon. And it remayneth more then manifest, Hereditary and Electiue to be incompatible, and cannot agree toge­ther: and herevpon necessarily the most strong Argu­ments of the Austrians to be vaine and of no effect.

Hitherto we haue answered the grounds of the Infor­mer, The Constitu­tions of the Kingdome. which he hath produced vnder the title A. 1. 2. 3. 4. Vnder the Letter B. hee alleageth the Constitutions of the Kingdome, X. but heere the Originals are to bee sought out of the Records at Prague, and not of Vienna, from whence the Informer tooke the concordances. But the States of Bohemia doe alleage, apply, and expound their Constitutions, according to the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome; practise obseruations, and by their Priuiledges and confirmed Customes. And why should the Bohemia [...]s, who euen to this day (as before at large is declared) haue had and exercised alwayes a free [Page 33] ELECTION, admit any restraint or limitation thereof.

Vnder the Letter C. is alleaged the Parliament of the Kingdome of the yeare 1547. inserted in the Tables of Kingdome,Fol. 1. but in the Margine onely; neither is there any Argument worthy of an Answere drawne from thence.

Vnder the Letter D. are againe cited the Constituti­ons of the Kingdome,Fol. 1. Fol. 2. B. 3. B. 7. B. 8. but without any further deduction. In the end hee doth alleage the Oath of the Inhabitants of Prague, and Leutmeritz made in the time of Iohn and Charles his Sonne; but that serueth onely for that time, neither can be drawne to any further consequence: and the tenor of the said Oath doth seeme to disagree with the intent of the Informer. For behold the expresse words of the Oath: ‘The Heires and Successours descending of the Line Masculine.’

Hence it appeareth that the vigor of that Oath was ex­pired for default of the Line Masculine of Luxemburgh, Fol. 2: Iohn of Luxem­burgh, by what right he attay­ned to the Crowne of Bo­hemia. and rather to make against the Austrians, whose pre­tence is grounded vpon the Female.

The Informer saith: ‘That Iohn of the House of Luxemburgh attayned to the Kingdome, it was because hee had to Wife the Daughter of the King of Bohemia.

For confirmation hereof, the Informer alleageth Hi­storians, when as it is altogether manifest that they meant another thing. For they say it was done by ELE­CTION, and the States of Bohemia to haue offered the [Page 34] Kingdome to Iohn the Sonne of Henrie the Emperour, which though the Emperour rather desired for his Bro­ther Walramus, then for his onely Sonne, as yet of more tender age, notwithstanding vpon the great instance of the Ambassadours (as they had in command) at length the said Iohn marryed to Wife the Daughter of the King of Bohemia. And so was first elected, and afterwards by reason of this ELECTION marryed to the Kings Daughter. See the words of Dubrauius: ‘In the Parliament at Numburge, there publikely in the Assembly with open voyces they desired another more fit King; hereunto enclined the voyces and suffrages of all, that Iohn of Luxemburgh, the sonne of Henrie the Emperour should be made choice of, for King to the Kingdome of Bohemia.

And this history by Haiecius is more at large described,Henry of Carin­thia, where­fore depriued of the King­dome. by reason of Henrie of Carinthia, who marryed the eldest Daughter of Wenceslaus. The Informer, saying that hee was deiected from the Throne of Bohemia, for rebellion against the Romane Empire, speaketh childishly: for not the pretended rebellion of the Informer, but his extorti­ons and cruelties made him odious to the people. The words of Dubrauius are these: ‘That they might bee deliuered from the intollerable Go­uernment of Henrie.

Neither could the Wife and Daughter of Henry (had the Kingdome beene Hereditarie) for his fault haue been depriued of their Right. Neither did the Daughter of Henrie (although nobly marryed, or his Sonne euer pre­tend any right at all to this Kingdome. It is false there­fore that the Kingdome fell to the younger Sister, by the elder Sister and her Husbands falling from their right, [Page 35] but by vertue of Election: and this Henrie to haue been ELECTED, and not to haue obtained the Kingdome by right of Succession. Dubrauius testifieth expresly in these words: ‘The States assembled in a lawfull Parliament, doe striue with great contention for ELECTING of a King: some altogether despising a stranger-King, the rest di­stracted betwixt Rodolph the sonne of Albertus the Emperour, and Henrie of Carinthia who was present.’

As for the Succession of the House of Luxemburgh, and of Albertus the Emperour, as also the ELECTI­ON of the Duke of Bauaria, & those things that follow, is alreadie answered: and the solemne and free ELEC­TION of Albertus sufficiently proued. Neither is it ma­teriall that the Morauians did expostulate with the Bo­hemians (whereof notwithstanding the Historie maketh no mention,) for the said free ELECTION of Alber­tus: For to the deciding of our case this doth nothing at all appertayne. The ELECTION of Podiebratius was not onely lawfull, but also confirmed by Frederick the Emperour himselfe, the head of the House of Austria, and to Podiebratius his Predecessor, Ladislaus at the point of death speaketh thus: ‘I must now dye, the Kingdome to come into thy hands: I aske of thee two things; one that thou gouerne the Prouincials iustly, &c. The other that those who haue followed mee out of Austria, and the other Prouinces thou send them backe safe into their Countrie without any violence offered them. Where is this Heredita­ry Succession?

Wherefore the words of the Informer concerning the Successor of Podiebratius, where he saith: [Page 36] After the death of George, Fol. 4. although hee left Heires Males, yet the Kingdome to haue returned againe of right to the ordinarie Succession;’

Is nothing but a meere Cauill, and idlenesse: for these are the expresse words of Cromerus.

Podiebratius signified to Casimire, King of Polonia, that hee would ordayne one of his sonnes,
Lib. 27. P. 393.
(with the consent of the States of Bohemia) for his Successour; his owne sonnes neglected; not by any Hereditarie right of a Kingdome (which is none at all among a free Nation) but by a singular inclination and affecti­on of all the Bohemians towards Casimire, and com­munion of Language with the Polonians.

Where is this ordinarie succession, which the Informer dreameth of? Is it to bee found in the designation of Podiebratius? or in the inclination of the Bohemians? or in the communion of Language with the Polonians? or lastly, in the words now repeated, Not by any Hereditarie Right of the Kingdome, which is none at all among a free Nation?

Here for conclusion it is to be knowne, and noted wel, that Lodwick King of Hungarie and Polonia, Ad pag. 156. had two Daughters; the elder whereof Marie, marryed Sigismund the Emperour, and King of Bohemia: the younger, Iagel­lus Prince of Lituania. After the death of Lodwicke, Si­gismund was ELECTED King of Hungarie, and Iagel­lus of Polonia. And although afterwards, the Queenes both of them dyed without any issue at all, yet the King­domes remayned to both the Kings: the reason, because they were both of them not Hereditarie (otherwise they had falne to the Queenes next Allies) but meerely Ele­ctiue. And although after that, the said Kings contracted [Page 37] other marriages nothing at all pertaining to the Bloud-royall of the aforesaid Lodwicke, or his Daughters, yet the children by them begotten were ELECTED after­wards for Kings. You see here succession, nothing at all to haue preuailed, but onely the free ELECTION of the States. Surely in Kingdomes hereditarie it is farre o­therwise. Philip the Second, King of Spaine, being ioy­ned in marriage with Marie Queene of England, after her death was forced to quitte all and be gone, and the Kingdome fell to Elizabeth the sister of Queene Marie: the reason, because it was hereditarie, and not (as the a­foresaid Kingdomes) ELECTIVE.

Ferdinand of Aragon, and his wife Isabel heire of Ca­stile, dying, & leauing behind them many daughters, the eldest daughter (the wife of Philip of Austria) was pre­ferred before the rest in the succession of all those King­domes: The reason, because all those Kingdomes were hereditarie, and not (as ours is) ELECTIVE.

Robert, King of Naples, leauing behind him three Nee­ces, the eldest of them (the two younger excluded) was admitted into the possession of the whole kingdome: the reason, because that Kingdome is hereditarie. And so this is to be obserued in all Kingdomes where women succeed. You see here betweene the Kingdomes of Po­land, Bohemia, and Hungarie (which are ELECTIVE:) and the Kingdomes of England, Castile, Naples, &c. (which are hereditarie, that also women succeed) verie great differences of succession. For if our Kingdomes should haue beene translated to women, surely Sigis­mund and Iagellus (their wiues being dead) should haue beene forced to haue left all and departed. Which not being done, it necessarily followeth the said Kingdomes to sauour of no hereditarie succession at all.

Hitherto briefly the ELECTIONS successiuely fol­lowing one another, with their principall circumstances, haue beene declared: to demonstrate the Bohemians not [Page 30] to be guiltie at all of rebellion, disloyaltie, and conspi­racie as the preiudicate Informer vrgeth. And if the In­former doe truely accuse them of such crimes, why doth he not expresse their cases? which if he had done, with­out doubt the Bohemians would easily haue confuted them. Also the Informer doth proceed to that audacitie, as to denie those Kings (whom he nameth) to haue been ELECTED: and so by his glosses is not ashamed to of­fer violence to a language, whereof (perhaps) he is ig­norant. Whenas notwithstanding the same Kings them­selues, especially Iohn, Albert, and Ferdinand in their let­ters (yea and that in the Latine Tongue, and Latine phra­ses written) doe confesse that they were ELECTED by the free ELECTION of the States.

The Informer proceedeth.Fol. 6.

Neither an absolute nor conditionall ELECTION doth belong to the States, but in case, &c.

Answer. What further conditions therefore haue the Bohemians prescribed to Rodolph of Austria, Podiebrati­us, and others (who obtained the Crowne through no precedent consanguinitie, but onely by ELECTION) then to the rest which were either brothers or sonnes of the precedent Kings? And the Letters reuersall, and the solemne oathes taken by all the Kings, what are they else but conditions, or couenants of great force, and con­ditionall ELECTIONS?Fol. 6.

But the Informer persisteth:

Although they did not obserue them, yet ought they not to be depriued of the Kingdome.

Answer. Surely the contrarie, by the aforesaid ex­amples, doth clearely appeare, and what other conse­quence can there be implied in the reciprocall obligation of a King and his subiects?

The Informer saith:Fol. 6. ‘Such penaltie is not prouided for by Couenant, Lawes, nor Parliaments.’

[Page 31] Answer.Haiec. fol. 233. The ancient obserued customes of the king­dome of Bohemia are in stead of written Lawes, yea a­mong other constitutions, the States in the reigne of So­bislaus expressely decreed: ‘That if at any time the King of Bohemia should with­out reason make warre against the Bohemians, then the States and people ought to be exempted, free, and absol­ued from all obedience and subiection.’

The Informer proceedeth:Fol. 6. ‘It is against equitie, that any one should be both an accu­ser, a witnesse, and a Iudge at once.’

Answer. The examples of Henrie of Carinthia, of Iohn, in respect of his exchange of Bohemia, and of other Kings, doe teach, that this is nothing at all against equi­tie. For the States euer haue beene, and are yet, the Cen­sors and Guardians of their priuiledges: yea also the la­ter Emperours ordained them to be Defendors of their E­dicts, and Liberties, and chiefly of Religion.

To the examples of Wenceslaus, and Podiebratius, Fol. 6. is al­readie answered.

The excuse vpon the receiuing of Matthias, Fol. 7. made An­no 1608. and 1611. that it was in the middest of Gar­boyls and warres, without any exact order, and that it maketh nothing for a free ELECTION, is altogether ridiculous. For the order there, (as those solemne acts and reuersals testifie, where the States free and lawfull right of ELECTION is confirmed) is most per­fect. Yea if no other reason remained to the States, suerly this so extraordinarie, and so solemne sworne con­tract, by the ioynt consent of two Kings, of Rodulph be­ing present, or rather precedent, and of his Successor Matthias, and of all the States of Bohemia, and the Pro­uinces incorporate, (which seldome before hath beene seene) might suffice for prouing the free ELECTION of the Bohemians to be lawfull. For the armes, and pow­er of writing, were wholly in the hands of the two Bro­thers [Page 40] the Kings. Neither hath the Stile which in wri­ting they vse, either one to another, or to the States, any such effect as the Informer pretendeth. Neither were themselues ignorant of the rights and priuiledges of their owne Family or persons: Nor (to conclude) would their Counsellors, who then were present, (had there beene a­ny things of importance) haue passed them ouer in si­lence.

Those things which follow, concerning the Treaties, Confederacies, with the Austrians, the Golden Bull, In­uestitures, and Imperiall Diets, seeing they are of no weight, I doe not see it worth the labour to insist in them a­ny longer.

The end of the Answer to the FIRST PART.

AN APPENDIX To the Reader.

SEeing (gentle Reader) the person of the Archduke Ferdinand now Emperour, and the question concer­ning him, (to wit, Whether he by that ELECTION, or by Admission, and Coronation, which he had in Bo­hemia, purchased the Right of that Scepter) doth require a speciall Treatise, which (God-willing) very shortly (vnder the title of An Answere to the Information against the Apologies and Writings of the States of Bohemia, the second Part) shall follow: I would haue thee to know for a conclusion of this first Part, and for a Prooeme to that which is to follow: that no Regall Right at all to that Kingdome came to Ferdinand, by the said ELEC­TION, or by Admission and Coronation. For the same to bee Electiue, and not at all Hereditarie, in this Part is sufficiently prooued. I omitt now to say that ELEC­TION not to haue beene lawfull, because it was not free, but for the most part surreptitious, fraudulent, and a­gainst the Lawes of the Kingdome: wherefore also it was no ELECTION, but altogether void, which being matter of Fact, I come to the point of Right: yea, sup­posing that they had proceeded lawfully, freely, and sim­ply after a voluntarie manner therein.

And first the nullitie of that Admission, and Corona­tion, for that reason is manifest, because by supposition, that Kingdome is Electiue; therefore no man can acquire any Regall Right therein, but by the ELECTION of those to whom it belongeth to elect, according to the Lawes and Customes of that Kingdome. But Ferdinand was not elected, neither by ELECTION entred into the Kingdome (as his owne Writings confesse, by which it is manifest that he would not be elected, but onely ad­mitted by Hereditary Right, as the adopted Sonne of the last lawfull King Matthias, or by some other right of [Page 42] Bloud) therefore he was not elected. But Coronation in an Electiue Kingdome doth presuppose a lawfull ELE­CTION, which if it do not first precede, all such Coro­nation of Right is friuolous, and none at all. Neither can they call that Admission (in what manner soeuer it was) ELECTION, or reduce it to ELECTION, because they doe expresly deny themselues to challenge that Kingdome by Right of ELECTION, and betake them­selues onely to Succession. When as therefore it shall bee proued, that Kingdome to bee Electiue and not Successi­onarie, by this onely proofe, whatsoeuer shall bee done without that which is properly called true and lawfull ELECTION, falleth to the ground.

Secondly be it, that the said ELECTION were free, voluntarie, and lawfull; it is plaine that the same was con­ditionall: to wit, that during the life of Matthias, Fer­dinand should not entermeddle with the Gouernment of the Kingdome, and should sweare to the Pactions, and obserue them: which Conditions doe quite take away all force from ELECTION, if any thing be done against them. Because ELECTION is not absolute, but con­ditionall: Now where the Conditions are wanting, there ELECTION is not ELECTION; for ELECTION ought to be voluntary; but a thing voluntarie conditio­nate, is not voluntary, except the condition bee perfor­med. But Ferdinand hath broken the Conditions, (as is manifest in Fact) therefore his ELECTION is of no force, and consequently neither his Coronation.

Thirdly, this ELECTION although it were an ELE­CTION, yet indeed it was none at all, of no validitie, or efficacie; because, (the King liuing and reigning) no other can in any wise be elected: Argument C. in Apibus 7. 9. &c. And the reasons are two, and both euident. The first, because the Electours haue not power of Electing, but when the seate of the Kingdome is vacant: therefore he was elected of such as had no power then of Electing. [Page 43] They may designe, and promise (as much as in them is for their time) a future Election, but can by no means make a present Election, because the right of Electing is not then open vnto them. Bald. in C. licet de vitanda Electione. The other reason is because iniury is done to the true Electors, which shall be lawfull, and haue a full power of Electing when the seat is vacant: whose power is vsurped by pre­occupation of them, whereof (perhaps) not one, or very few shall be Electors when the seat shall be vacant. And it sufficeth (if the iniurie be done to one onely) to make the whole Act vniust, and therefore vnlawfull. Bald. vt supra, & Iason in L. fin. C. de Pact. There may (perhaps) two at once reigne together as if they were one, (as in times past they that were fellowes in the Empire:) the King also liuing, may resigne his Regall Right, to the end his Sonne, or some other may bee elected; but in our case there is no such thing: because neither Matthias resigned his Regall Right, but manifestly retayned it, neither did he assume Ferdinand as his companion. And that Election and Coronation was made with expresse reseruation of all full Royall Power wholly and entyrely in Marthias, and with an inhibition, that Ferdinand by no meanes should intrude himselfe into the Gouernment of that Kingdome. These reasons likewise doe constrayne vs vtterly to deny that hee is lawfully chosen King of the Romanes, who is chosen King of the Romanes, that is to say, future Emperor while the present Emperor liueth, and doth not resigne the Right of the Kingdome of the Romanes: that is to say, the Romane Empire: be­cause the Electours then Electing, had not in act, and in­deed, but onely in habit, power of Electing, the seat be­ing not yet vacant. And iniurie is done to the Electours, when the seate of the Empire is vacant, whose actuall power was vnlawfully vsurped. Therefore might the E­lectors of the Empire come to a new Election, the Empe­rour being dead, the King of the Romanes (who was wrongfully chosen,) excluded. The same reasons doe al­together [Page 44] nullifie all Reuersions, & benefits in expectance, as also may easily be proued out of the Lawes.

Fourthly,See the Pacti­ons concer­ning a per­petuall Suc­cession in the Kingdomes of Hungarie and Bohemia, and the Prouinces thereunto ap­pertayning, for the further de­claration of the truth; an­nexed to this Appendix. (to conclude) that Election and Coronation of Ferdinand, although it were of validitie, (which wee haue shewed to be false) yet well might hee be depriued thereof by the Kingdome; because now hee consented to the oppression of the libertie of the Kingdome, vexing the Kingdome with Armes, and endeauouring of Elec­tiue to make it Successionarie; and to translate the same Kingdome after him to others; and notwithstanding as yet not actually possessed of the Kingdome, nor hauing receiued power from God: by men therefore hee might vpon iust cause be depriued of that right which hee had, not in the thing, but to the thing onely. For a King is E­lected for the preseruation of the Kingdome, and not for the destruction. And a Kingdome may defend her owne proper libertie lawfully against any whosoeuer; yea a­gainst her owne King: especially such a one who hath bin onely designed, and thereby become an Enemie of the Kingdome, & an vniust oppressor of the liberty thereof.

The same reasons also proue that the Hungarians might iustly come to another Election (Ferdinand excluded,) it being supposed likewise, that Kingdome also to be Elec­tiue as they prooue. For there was no Election of Ferdi­nand, but an Admission, and if it were an Election, (the lawfull King as yet liuing and reigning) yet was it void: Neither is it materiall that the Hungarians held as ra­tified their Election of the person of Ferdinand after the death of Matthias, (which yet the Bohemians haue not done) because that ratification, whether it were tacite & vertuall, yea, or also expressed, is of no effect: For that which is nothing cannot bee accounted ratified. SYLV. consensus q. vlt. vnlesse the Electors knew their Election to be of no validitie at all, and knowing it doe not ratifie the same but make a new Election. And if they thinke it was of validitie, when it was not, and doe ratifie it, not making a new Election, this ratification is of no force. Caiet. secund. secunda. G. 189. Art. 8. &c.

THE INSTRVMENTS of the Pactions or Conditions concer­ning a Perpetuall Succession in the Kingdomes of Hungary and Bohemia, and the Prouinces thereunto belonging.

THE INSTRVMENTS OF THE 6. and 15. of the Month of Iune, Anno 1617. made at Prague.
  • PHILIP the III. King of Spaine, renouncing his right, and ratifying the resignation of his Mother ANNE, daugh­ter to MAXIMILIAN the second Emperour: As also for this resignation couenanting as wel for a compensation or recompence to be made to himselfe, as for a Restitution to his Heyres whensoeuer the Heyres Male lawfully begot­ten shall faile in the right Line of FERDINAND Arch-Duke of Austria.
  • FERDINAND Arch-Duke of Austria accepting, appro­uing and ratifying them, and (in case of defalt of Heyres Male in the right Line lawfully descended from him,) promising restitution.
  • MATTHIAS the II. Emperor of Rome, not onely pro­curing these Pactions by his Intercession; but also by his Imperiall and Royall Authority confirming them.

For the weale and safety of the Catholike Religion, and Maiesty of the House of Austria.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.