CASE OF THE POST-NATI OF SCOTLAND. 155 



&quot; seigniories (for I give you the very words again) 

 &quot; that pertain to our sovereign lord the king, (it is 

 &quot; not said, as are the dominions of England) are as 

 &quot; able and inheritable of their heritage in England, 

 &quot; as other infants born within the realm of England.&quot; 

 What can be more plain ? And so I leave statutes 

 and go to precedents ; for though the one do bind 

 more, yet the other sometimes doth satisfy more. 



For precedents, in the producing and using of 

 that kind of proof, of all others it behoveth them to 

 be faithfully vouched ; for the suppressing or keeping 

 back of a circumstance, may change the case : and 

 therefore I am determined to urge only such prece 

 dents, as are without all colour or scruple of excep 

 tion or objection, even of those objections which I 

 have, to my thinking, fully answered and confuted. 

 This is now, by the providence of God, the fourth 

 time that the line and kings of England have had 

 dominions and seigniories united unto them as patri 

 monies, and by descent of blood ; four unions, I say, 

 there have been inclusive with this last. The first 

 was of Normandy, in the person of William, com 

 monly called the Conqueror. The second was of 

 Gascoigne, and Guienne, and Anjou, in the person of 

 king Henry II.; in his person, I say, though by 

 several titles. The third was of the crown of France, 

 in the person of king Edward III. And the fourth 

 of the kingdom of Scotland, in his majesty. Of 

 these I will set aside such as by any cavillati &amp;gt;n can 

 be excepted unto. First, 1 will set aside Normandy, 

 because it will be said, that the difference of coun- 



