12 1 CASE OF THE POST-NAT1 OF SCOTLAND. 



generation is still of liege parents, and therefore na 

 turalized ; so as you may have whole tribes and 

 lineages of English in foreign countries. 



And therefore it is utterly untrue that the law of 

 England cannot operate or confer naturalization, but 

 only within the bounds of the dominions of England. 

 To come now to their inferences upon statutes ; the 

 first is out of this statute which I last recited. In 

 which statute it is said, that in four several places 

 there are these words, &quot; born within the allegiance 

 &quot; of England ;&quot; or again, &quot; born without the allegi- 

 &quot; of England,&quot; which, say they, applies the allegi 

 ance to the kingdom, and not to the person of the 

 king. To this the answer is easy ; for there is no 

 trope of speech more familiar than to use the place 

 of addition for the person. So we say commonly, 

 the line of York, or the line of Lancaster, for the 

 lines of the duke of York, or the duke of Lancaster. 



So we say the possessions of Somerset, or War 

 wick, intending the possessions of the dukes of So 

 merset or earls of Warwick. So we see earls sign, 

 Salisbury, Northampton, for the earls of Salisbury 

 or Northampton. And in the very same manner the 

 statute speaks, allegiance of England, for allegiance 

 of the king of England. Nay more, if there had 

 been no variety in the penning of that statute, this 

 collection had had a little more force ; for those 

 words might have been thought to have been used of 

 purpose and in propriety ; but you may find in three 

 other several places of the same statute, allegiance 

 and obeisance of the king of England, and especially 



