150 CASE OF THE POST-NATI Ol&amp;gt; SCOTLAND. 



Scotsman, who is a subject to the natural person of 

 the king, and not to the crown of England ; can a 

 Scotsman, I say, be an enemy by the law to the sub 

 jects of England ? Or must he not of necessity, if he 

 should invade England, be a rebel and no enemy, 

 not only as to the king, but as to the subject ? Or 

 can any letters of mart or reprisal be granted against 

 a Scotsman that shall spoil an Englishman s goods 

 at sea ? And certainly this case doth press exceeding 

 near the principal case ; for it proveth plainly, that 

 the natural person of the king hath such a commu 

 nication of qualities with his body politic, as it makes 

 the subjects of either kingdom stand in another de 

 gree of privity one towards the other, than they did 

 before. And so much for the second proof. 



For the five acts of parliament which I spoke of, 

 which are concluding to this question. 



The first of them is that concerning the banish 

 ment of Hugh Spencer in the time of king Edward 

 II. in which act there is contained the charge and ac 

 cusation whereupon his exile proceeded. One arti 

 cle of which charge is set down in these words : 

 &quot; Homage and oath of the subject is more by reason 

 &quot; of the crown than by reason of the person of the 

 &quot; king, So that if the king doth not guide himself 

 &quot; by reason in right of the crown, his lieges are 

 &quot; bound by their oath to the crown to remove the 

 king.&quot; 



By which act doth plainly appear the perilous 

 consequence of this distinction concerning the person 

 of the king and the crown. And yet I do ac- 



